LXXVIII: Politicus Lupus (GAME OVER!! SEE POST #2593 FOR RESULTS)

[Tyrith]

I came up with some thoughts for legislation that could be useful but are still really narrow which I'll share with the Republicans now.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Mrs. Schmidty (R) (7)- Passacaglia-R (1146), Kwhit-D (1147), Chesapeake-D (1276), Path12-D (1286), Tyrith-R (1301), Chubby-D (1319), PurdueBrad-R (GM)

Tyrith (R) (5) - PackerFanatic-D (1220), Eaglefan-D (1279), Mrs. Schmidty-R (1306), Lathum-D (1312), mccollins-D (1324)

Lathum (D) (1) - jeheinz72-R (1237)

jeheinz72 (R) (1) - henry296-D (1313)

Pulling this up as I think it's, naturally, our most important vote to date.

Time to get some chatter going on today's vote, it's a biggie. Bigger than any bill/etc stuff.

We've got 7 voters on the wolf, 1 of them confirmed as good (path) and 1 that I think a great many of us consider to be good (KWhit, though that's my personal gauge at least)

We've got 9 voters not on the known wolf, 1 known wolf (Mrs. S) and 1 known villager (EF), counting the 2 who didn't vote (illini and RendeR)

Personally, what sticks out to me are the Dems on Tyrith.

[Lathum]

What sticks out to me is that you failed to commit to one of the 2 candidates being considered.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

What sticks out to me is that you failed to commit to one of the 2 candidates being considered.

Easy there sparky, when I left, here's what the votes looked like:

Wolf:
2 Mrs. Schmidty: Pass (1146), Kwhit (1147)
1 PurdueBrad: EagleFan (1123)
1 Jeheinz72: Lathum (1187)
1 Tyrith: PackerFanatic (1220)
1 Lathum: Jeheinz72(1237)

It wasn't a 2-horse race at that point, and your vote isn't on either of them as well.

I realize it means little, but had I been on once the 2-horse race developed, I would've absolutely voted Mrs. S as I am of the opinion that Tyrith is a villager.

[jeheinz72]

Vote Mccollins

Been giving me a wolf vibe for awhile now. As far as the vote I pulled up, it's his and Lathum's votes that stick out the most to me. I'm giving Lathum a pass for now since I don't think Lathum would make such a poor play as to come after me (when I've since dropped my agression towards him) if he were a wolf. There'd just be no point to that if he was.

[Lathum]

VOTE JEHEINZE

something has been off with him all game.

[path12]

Crap. Good luck to my colleagues.

[Tyrith]

My trust list goes two deep right now - KWhit and Pass. heinz has correctly taken up my side for a while here, but that could be a play to win my trust so that I don't try to get him killed.

I didn't like the mccollins vote either...I could vote in that way, or for heinz, or for Lathum, or for PF, or for....I don't really have much of a read right now in general, to be honest.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

VOTE JEHEINZE

something has been off with him all game.

Please explain. Here I am easing off the pedal on you, and you push.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I don't really have much of a read right now in general, to be honest.

Hence why I voted so early. It's an important vote today. The more talk the better, IMO.

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by mccollins

Honestly I agree. However, I had about 5 minutes to get a vote in before the popularity deadline (still missed it) and I just followed your lead in voting for one of the people I mentioned as a suspect earlier in the day in our party thread.

In the end, it all worked out and luckily I didn't prevent the lynch of a wolf!

Here's what I said after the result on the night my vote is in question. It still stands and it still sucked.

[jeheinz72]

Understood. My vote still stands.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Please explain. Here I am easing off the pedal on you, and you push.

thats my point, I'm not saying I want you to vote for me but another ill cast vote and people will be looking towards you.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

thats my point, I'm not saying I want you to vote for me but another ill cast vote and people will be looking towards you.

Well a vote for me is an ill cast vote, and you've had your share this game my friend.

Do you have reason to trust Collins at this point?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Well a vote for me is an ill cast vote, and you've had your share this game my friend.

Do you have reason to trust Collins at this point?

nope, to be honest if this was straight up ww McCollins would be my vote

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

nope, to be honest if this was straight up ww McCollins would be my vote

What happened to huntin' wolves then? I mean, no one good wins if the wolves do and the Dems still out-number the Repubs 6-5. You lynch a Repub today and I'd bet you're looking at a countering Dem night-kill. So then what, you'd lynch another repub when it's 5-4?

Also, keep in mind, the "expected" start (that I got heat for even suggesting might not be accurate) was 4 wolves, 2 Dems and 2 Repubs. Taking yourself out of the equation Lathum, that leaves

Repubs: 1 Wolf out of 5
Dems: 2 Wolves out of 5

Villager Dems should be looking to vote a Dem today, truth be told. That's admiteddly a self-serving fact for me, but it's still a fact.

[PackerFanatic]

McCollins and Lathum are on my list...I am going to see how things play out today.

[Lathum]

I am fully aware of the numbers and have discussed them in my partys thread.

But the fact is your party has continued to try and sabatouge me, undermine me, and do everything they can to get me out of the game.

I would just as soon eliminate you all while we have the numbers then worry about the wolves from my own party.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I am fully aware of the numbers and have discussed them in my partys thread.

But the fact is your party has continued to try and sabatouge me, undermine me, and do everything they can to get me out of the game.

I would just as soon eliminate you all while we have the numbers then worry about the wolves from my own party.

That is *very* poor strategy, and frankly, I think if you execute that plan, you're almost sure to lose the game.

But hey, I can't stop you, I can only hope that the villager Dems on your side don't see it the same way. I think we're still at a point where working together instead of party lines gives each of us a better shot at beating the wolves.

[jeheinz72]

Hi Alan (and mccollins)

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

I think we're still at a point where working together instead of party lines gives each of us a better shot at beating the wolves.

sorry but that is a hard pill to swallow when I get my first election sabatouged then you guys hammer me is my second election and if I didn't have the ability to guarentee my own re election I would be out of the game thanks to you guys.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

sorry but that is a hard pill to swallow when I get my first election sabatouged then you guys hammer me is my second election and if I didn't have the ability to guarentee my own re election I would be out of the game thanks to you guys.

I get that. I still think you're going down a losing path if you go that route.

And at the time, we thought we were hunting a wolf as much as getting a Dem gone. You're not really hunting wolves with your strategy though, are you?

[jeheinz72]

Furthermore

- I've been slurried what, twice now by the Dems? I'm still open to working with you guys

- And if it's re-election that's a concern at all for you Lathum, then the last person you want to see die is me. When I come up good you'll have what, 3 votes for me on the tally? That surely won't be a good thing for you.

[Tyrith]

Lathum, all I was doing was trying to get a second lynch that I thought would be useful. If you're actually a villager you should be able to understand that and move on from it, from a rational perspective. I can understand being angry about it but anger in this case seems highly wolfish.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Lathum, all I was doing was trying to get a second lynch that I thought would be useful. If you're actually a villager you should be able to understand that and move on from it, from a rational perspective. I can understand being angry about it but anger in this case seems highly wolfish.

seems like the wolfish thing to me is telling us you want to work with us then slamming me during my elections.

I suggest you look at your party and see who was driving the agenda to get that "second lynch" because all it is was an oppritunity for the wolves to get a free villager kill.

[jeheinz72]

Just a heads up Dems, since I just realized it myself, but the wolves need to get a 1:1 ratio of *districts* not people. You guys may full well know that, but I figured I'd throw it out there as I just realized it myself.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Just a heads up Dems, since I just realized it myself, but the wolves need to get a 1:1 ratio of *districts* not people. You guys may full well know that, but I figured I'd throw it out there as I just realized it myself.

i don't even know what that means

[PackerFanatic]

That wolves don't need to match us people-wise, they only need to control as many districts as us.

And I didn't realize that, thanks for the heads up heinz.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

WINNING THE GAME

Democrats and Republicans-- Eliminate the wolves. That is the ultimate condition. If you eliminate the wolves AND end the game as the more powerful party, you win a MAJOR WIN. If you end the game as the lesser powerful party, you still win a MINOR WIN.

You also have the individual achievement award of finishing the game as the most influential politician in Washington. This will be a combination of the final Popular and Political polls. It's a title award only, an individual win that is good to get, but not the ultimate win that comes with the political party.

Wolves-- Get to the point where you can control a Congressional vote to put the Wolf Party back in power. You do this by controlling open districts. No action is necessary to make this happen. Once the Wolves control as many districts as a combination of the other two political parties, the game will end in a WOLF victory.

looks like that is a wolf win condition Heinze...

[jeheinz72]

And when you look, you see that Cronin's death benefitted Mrs. S

KWhit's death would've benefitted Lathum (also busted the COT a touch, which could've been the primary or ancillary reason behind it)

Path's death benefitted both Collins and PF.


Frankly, Path's death, when combined with neither voting for Mrs. Schmidty makes me think that one of the two is almost certainly a wolf.

[Lathum]

NM, I get it now. I was confused, imagine that

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

looks like that is a wolf win condition Heinze...

Yeah, exactly. I just read it when looking up the general win conditions. I didn't notice it when I first read the rules.

Working backwards from the wolves win conditions to what they're trying to accomplish provides some good insight IMO, stated above.

[Lathum]

I have no idea who controls what distric or why.

Thank god I'm not a wolf this game, I would be the worlds worst wolf...

[PackerFanatic]

VOTE LYNCH MCCOLLINS

I haven't felt right about him and seeing the win condition that I overlooked earlier, it makes sense that he would want to see Path gone.

[PurdueBrad]

vote mccollins

But I can't support Packerfanatic for speaker on the chance that he's actually the wolf of the two.

[jeheinz72]

Basically the person who controls one of the districts next to the departed one controls it. I presume it goes on popularity but I haven't actually checked.

WHo controls what is updated and it's like the 4th-ish post in here.

It helps the wolves because let's say 3 of them control 3 districts each, then they win, even if the other 9 districts are controlled by 9 villagers.

So while we're likely at a 10:3 "person" ratio right now, we could be actually only up 12:6 in terms of districts (though I don't think we are).

[PackerFanatic]

I might be mistaken, but I think a person can only control up to 2 districts. I haven't seen anyone control 3 yet and I would be surprised if they could.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

I might be mistaken, but I think a person can only control up to 2 districts. I haven't seen anyone control 3 yet and I would be surprised if they could.

Is that in the rules? If so, we've got a LOT of wolves then

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

I might be mistaken, but I think a person can only control up to 2 districts. I haven't seen anyone control 3 yet and I would be surprised if they could.

I just don't see a reason why anyone would have controlled 3 so far this game. But I bet it can happen -- once we get less than 9 people in the game, it has to.

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

VOTE LYNCH MCCOLLINS

I haven't felt right about him and seeing the win condition that I overlooked earlier, it makes sense that he would want to see Path gone.

The italicized part above is so generic - I "haven't felt right" about a lot of people in this game and I could use that excuse on anyone.

If you're worried about Packer, notice that he wanted the Speaker's position of power so bad that he led out and voted for himself this morning before any discussion.

[jeheinz72]

But Speaker is of no power right now. I mean we can't even pass party bills of any real strength, so what good is being Speaker?

[mccollins]

dola, I tried to italicize "I haven't felt right about him"

[PackerFanatic]

I simply put myself out there as speaker because I felt why mess around all day arguing about it, while we could be having this argument instead?

And I suppose you are right Pass, once we lose more people I guess we will see. That would make sense I suppose.

[jeheinz72]

Vote RendeR for Speaker

[RendeR]

I thank my esteemed colleague for the Nomination. It has occurred to me that having a member of this Congress in a position of power when he is coming under some severe scrutiny as to his true party aliegience would be, at best a bad decision.

I hereby accept my good friend Jeheinz nomination and vote for Speaker of the House and will promote myself accordingly.

Vote RendeR Speaker of the House

[illinifan999]

Vote RendeR for Speaker

[Passacaglia]

SPEAK RENDER FOR VOTER

[jeheinz72]

I'd love to hear from the Dems on who they trust more and why as far as Collins and PF. I've had suspicions on both this game at one point or another. I presume you all trust PF more, hence the Speaker nod from a few days back, but I'd like to know that and not presume it.

[Lathum]

I trust PF far more

[illinifan999]

vote lynch mccollins