Werewolf XXXIII: Animal Farm (SEE POST #4 FOR ALL UPDATES)

[path12]

Through post #199:

Anxiety 3 -- ardent (146), BrianD (177), Swaggs (180)
BrianD 2 -- Bek (131), Passacaglia (153)
Swaggs 2 -- Anxiety (107), Lathum (144)
RealDeal 2 -- saldana (152), Grammaticus (169)
Blade6119 2 -- Greyroofoo (92), RealDeal (197)
Conflaguration 1 -- st.cronin (77)
Chubby 1 -- bulletsponge (74)
hoops 1 -- Alan T (75)
Bek 1 -- Dodgerchick (79)
bulletsponge 1 -- Chubby (80)
Greyroofoo 1 -- Blade (85)
st.cronin 1 -- Conflaguration (97)

Not voting: hoopsguy, GoldenEagle

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Lathum

i love werewolf.

I love when people always assume im the one who starts this stuff...if i respond to his taunts, im being blade..if i dont, im still a dick

[Abe Sargent]

Blade, if it makes ya feel better, I've never voted for you for any reason other than an in game reason.

-Anxiety

[Abe Sargent]

Lathum and Blade, you are both on right now. Here's an interesting question. I may have to move my vote off Swaggs (who is acting oddly) for pure self defense reasons. The only options right now are Blade, BrianD and RealDeal. I'm not jumping right now, but of those three, which one would you vote for and why?

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Lathum and Blade, you are both on right now. Here's an interesting question. I may have to move my vote off Swaggs (who is acting oddly) for pure self defense reasons. The only options right now are Blade, BrianD and RealDeal. I'm not jumping right now, but of those three, which one would you vote for and why?

Well 1 is me, so i dont think i would vote myself. Another is the one attacking me, so my judgement might be clouded there. Brian was quite happy to gang up on you, with swaggs.

Id wait to move your vote. Hoops was considering voting swaggs, and i want to move my vote. Im just trying to make sure i dont let my emotions push me in a certain way if the clues lead elsewhere.

[Abe Sargent]

Oh, I don;t expect to do it for a while, but I want to be thinking about it.

[Abe Sargent]

hoops, saldana, any ideas?

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Oh, I don;t expect to do it for a while, but I want to be thinking about it.

Im willing to work with you...i would prefer if you didnt die on day 1, as you are always fun to play with/against.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

hoops, saldana, any ideas?

not really a big fan of the the move swaggs/briand just pulled on you and was thinking about going to swaggs....reason for him instead of brian is that swaggs was using your "standing up for lathum" as a reason to vote for you....

he has been in enough games to have seen people answer for other people before...i have done it hundreds of times if someone is being accused of going UTR, but i know why they arent here (like when you are a no show every tuesday). i thought that for him to say that no one ever stands up for another player unless they have something to hide was odd, possibly just trying to drum up a run on someone

and since it is day one, which means we all basically got nothing, thats the strongest case i could build.

[Abe Sargent]

Fair enough saldana.

[Alan T]

Is it just me or are alot of people stirring up alot of stuff on day 1.. Im not really sure why people are jumping at each other for early maneuvering.. my assumption is that usually day 1 we're all off track anyways and are just fighting amongst ourselves..

I think to make a whole bunch of fuss that will set us in the wrong direction for days is kind of silly.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Is it just me or are alot of people stirring up alot of stuff on day 1.. Im not really sure why people are jumping at each other for early maneuvering.. my assumption is that usually day 1 we're all off track anyways and are just fighting amongst ourselves..

I think to make a whole bunch of fuss that will set us in the wrong direction for days is kind of silly.

See, but what if this is the time were not. We have had day 1s, at least 4-5, with wolves in close duels. Even 2 i think that were wolf-wolf. Usually the wolves get off...ya, sometimes its villager villager, but sometimes theres a wolf. I think we have to take a chance and hope we get a wolf in a runoff

[path12]

One note: Commute + gym = results when I get done (prob around 10 Eastern). All votes after 9 will not count of course......and night orders/tiebreaks are welcome anytime.

[Swaggs]

I am back early and catching up.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by saldana

not really a big fan of the the move swaggs/briand just pulled on you and was thinking about going to swaggs....reason for him instead of brian is that swaggs was using your "standing up for lathum" as a reason to vote for you....

he has been in enough games to have seen people answer for other people before...i have done it hundreds of times if someone is being accused of going UTR, but i know why they arent here (like when you are a no show every tuesday). i thought that for him to say that no one ever stands up for another player unless they have something to hide was odd, possibly just trying to drum up a run on someone

and since it is day one, which means we all basically got nothing, thats the strongest case i could build.

I disagree with you. I think it is strange for anyone to make themselves more visible on day one, like Anxiety did in "attacking" me for voting for Lathum. Anxiety is probably only a one-in-five shot of being evil, but I thought his behavior stood out as being strange, so I voted for him.

If people think I am acting strange by voting for him over that, rather than randomly picking someone, I don't know what to do about that.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

See, but what if this is the time were not. We have had day 1s, at least 4-5, with wolves in close duels. Even 2 i think that were wolf-wolf. Usually the wolves get off...ya, sometimes its villager villager, but sometimes theres a wolf. I think we have to take a chance and hope we get a wolf in a runoff

I guess.. I just don't really know how to quantify voting for people in a close vote when I don't know anything about them and all of their arguements seem a bit weird for the day 1 vote. I don't really feel like sticking my neck out right now for any of them to be honest.

[hoopsguy]

Alan, my thoughts on this is that it is a Day 1 vote, more or less. But if you start to feel some kind of currents emerging with the votes, it makes sense to pay attention to them. We just have less context now than we would for this later in the game. And, truth be told, we are going to be lacking context for most of the game with how it is currently structured.

For this reason (lack of published results on both day and night kills) I'm guessing we are not facing many evils to start. I'm thinking two original Revolutionaries + Pilkington, plus the seer and convert, which count as villagers. So our chances of hitting someone today are not that good. And, even if we do, we probably don't learn about it for a couple of days.

OK, time for a quick re-read before submitting my vote.

[st.cronin]

I don't have any particular insight but I think we really, really need to avoid a tie.

[hoopsguy]

By the way, my favorite post of the game so far has been RealDeal accusing Conflagration of being UTR.

On Day 1.

When he had less than five total FOFC posts prior to the start of this game.

I'm also tempted to vote for Blade/Bek for exchange Oreo cookie smoothies or whatever else happened during their late-night chat (as noted by Chief Rum).

In regards to Swaggs, if he is playing as a bad guy he is off to a poor start. Messing up the deadline and the players who had not posted (as pointed out by Anxiety and Passacaglia, respectively) is not exactly playing to win as a bad guy. I was pretty sure I was going to put my vote on him after Passacaglia's questioning (posts #178 - 185), but as I'm thinking about it now I'm moving towards the idea that Swaggs is a better player than this. And most people are more careful as evil than they are as good. His usual style is to play a more quiet game than this. Why is he being this aggressive early in the game?

Sigh ... I really don't think that everything is 100% on the up-and-up with the vote runoff this afternoon. And I trust Anxiety more than Swaggs at this point, so I would prefer not to see him killed. So despite my 2nd-guessing above I'm going to


VOTE SWAGGS

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I don't have any particular insight but I think we really, really need to avoid a tie.

Any particular reason you feel this way?

My understanding was someone randomly has a tiebreaker that they can use. then when they use it, it goes to someone else each time.

Didn't sound like a bad thing or good thing really to me.

[hoopsguy]

Cronin, I have just forced the tie you wanted to avoid with GoldenEagle remaining. The two people tied (Swaggs and Anxiety) already have their votes on each other, so they are unlikely to move them.

Given that the tie-breaker rotates, is there any downside to the tie-breaker revealing themselves? Does it make them a better/worse target for the Revolutionaries or for the rest of the Farm?

I fully expect to be attacked now for trying to force a role reveal by the tie-breaker Which I'm not necessarily advocating, just trying to understand the merits of secrecy for this transitional role in this specific game.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Any particular reason you feel this way?

My understanding was someone randomly has a tiebreaker that they can use. then when they use it, it goes to someone else each time.

Didn't sound like a bad thing or good thing really to me.

Only thing that gives me unease about it is that it might give the badguys an easy victim to kill, without generating any discussion about WHY that player was killed.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Cronin, I have just forced the tie you wanted to avoid with GoldenEagle remaining. The two people tied (Swaggs and Anxiety) already have their votes on each other, so they are unlikely to move them.

Given that the tie-breaker rotates, is there any downside to the tie-breaker revealing themselves? Does it make them a better/worse target for the Revolutionaries or for the rest of the Farm?

I fully expect to be attacked now for trying to force a role reveal by the tie-breaker Which I'm not necessarily advocating, just trying to understand the merits of secrecy for this transitional role in this specific game.

they cant reveal that they have the tiebreaker...although reading this:

Originally Posted by path12 from The Rules

Tiebreak procedure: A player will be chosen at random to have the tiebreak power one time only. Once used, a new player will be chosen at random. Please do not reveal when you have the tiebreak upon pain of a sudden lightning bolt striking you down and out of the game.

i am not sure if that means you cant say it was you after the day has ended...i think we need a clarification on that from Path before anyone says anything.


btw, i am leaving my vote on RD...after the disaster last game with leading the day one charge, i am going to revert to my sit back and observe everyone else strategy that has served me better in the past.

[saldana]

dola, i am out until after the deadline...gotta go to lunch

[st.cronin]

Yeah, I guess it's possible that who broke the tie doesn't get revealed. Anyway, my caution wasn't particularly game-specific, just that in general a day 1 tie is useless.

[Swaggs]

I would agree that a tie could be a bad thing.

If the vote is between one good and one evil player, and the tiebreak goes to an evil player (probably a 20% chance w/ 20 players and at least 2 revolutionaries, Squealer, Pilkington, and Minimus), they would have the advantage of knowing one another.

[Alan T]

I guess I dont see anywhere that says the tiebreakers are either good or bad for sure. My assumption was that it wouldn't tell us much about the person...

[Abe Sargent]

Prisoner's DIlemma 0- Swaggs and I could save ourselves by both moving to BrainD or RealDeal and we'd both be alive tomorrow.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Prisoner's DIlemma 0- Swaggs and I could save ourselves by both moving to BrainD or RealDeal and we'd both be alive tomorrow.

I won't vote for Brian, since he voted to help me, but if you make the call...

[Abe Sargent]

I'm not sandbagging RealDeal then

[Abe Sargent]

That looks like time

[Abe Sargent]

Well, see you guys after lynch

[hoopsguy]

Pilkington and the evil seer don't have any information if they hold the tie-breaker. Only the revolutionaries should have information about other players at this point.

[Swaggs]

It is kind of rough that the person making the tiebreaker is not known to the public. If, down the road, whoever the survivor is between Anxiety and me gets killed and turns out to be evil, we could learn a lot from it.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It is kind of rough that the person making the tiebreaker is not known to the public. If, down the road, whoever the survivor is between Anxiety and me gets killed and turns out to be evil, we could learn a lot from it.

So if you win this vote and end up being evil you are saying?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Alan T

So if you win this vote and end up being evil you are saying?

I don't know that I would exactly call it a "win."

[path12]

Final vote count:

Anxiety 3 -- ardent (146), BrianD (177), Swaggs (180)
Swaggs 3 -- Anxiety (107), Lathum (144), hoops (219)
BrianD 2 -- Bek (131), Passacaglia (153)
RealDeal 2 -- saldana (152), Grammaticus (169)
Blade6119 2 -- Greyroofoo (92), RealDeal (197)
Conflaguration 1 -- st.cronin (77)
Chubby 1 -- bulletsponge (74)
hoops 1 -- Alan T (75)
Bek 1 -- Dodgerchick (79)
bulletsponge 1 -- Chubby (80)
Greyroofoo 1 -- Blade (85)
st.cronin 1 -- Conflaguration (97)

Not voting: GoldenEagle

Results coming shortly.

[Abe Sargent]

Just me, path and Swaggs in teh thread.

[hoopsguy]

It was a quiet deadline today.

[Swaggs]

Odd move by Golden Eagle to unvote and then not vote for someone else.

[path12]

Nobody remembers such a sad day, even after the death of Old Major. For you have evil among you, and suspicions fly. Friends accusing friends, and for awhile it seems almost as if everyone is pointing a finger at someone different. Arguments get heated, voices are raised. Finally a small coalition develops and the suspect list is narrowed to Swaggs and Anxiety, who are summoned to step forward. They are guarded by a couple of dogs as the rest of you huddle to determine who will die.

Finally, the tie is broken, and Swaggs is the choice of the crowd.

As he is called forward Swaggs finally speaks. His voice is steady and firm as he chides the animals for their foolish choice, and lays out the case against.......st.cronin. His words are soothing and 100% convincing, and the mob wavers. Another huddle is called, and this time there is no wavering. st.cronin is set upon and killed.

After the deed there is silence. You wander back to the barn, and some of you notice that there has been a change in one of the commandments:

1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
3. No animal shall wear clothes.
4. No animal shall sleep in a bed.
5. No animal shall drink alcohol.
6. No animal shall kill any other animal without cause.
7. All animals are equal.

You are troubled, but hope that you have chosen wisely. Nobody expects to sleep well tonight.

ST.CRONIN HAS BEEN LYNCHED. NIGHT ORDERS ARE DUE BY 9AM EASTERN TOMORROW 9/12.

[Abe Sargent]

Interesting Swaggs

[hoopsguy]

Swaggs, two quick questions:

1.) Why Cronin?
2.) Were you looking to put yourself in harms way, to see who was playing against you today?

[Swaggs]

Unfortunate that I had to reveal so early on.

Thinking it over, I didn't pick Anxiety for the same reasons I found him suspicious--I think the evil players would try to stay out of conflict and let us good guys pick each other apart on day 1, while they sit back and watch.

I randomly chose st. cronin from the list of seven players that casted non-grouped votes. My thinking was that, of those seven, two or three of the evil players are probably just hoping to stay under the radar. Sorry if I am wrong, st. cronin.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Swaggs, two quick questions:

1.) Why Cronin?
2.) Were you looking to put yourself in harms way, to see who was playing against you today?

1.) I figure the odds are pretty good that two or three of the seven people that casted "throwaway" votes were evil and trying to stay under the radar and avoid leaving a voting history. Cronin was just a random, day 1 choice from the list of those seven players.

2.) I made an honest mistake with the deadline and Bek, but played it up a little bit afterwards and was a bit more gruff than I would normally be, hoping to get people to get away from the non-grouped votes.

[Abe Sargent]

I don't mind, obviously

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I don't mind, obviously

I still think it was odd that you voted for me for voting for Lathum, but it wouldn't make a lot of sense for you two to be tied together on day one if you are both evil.

[Swaggs]

If I would have just come out and said that Hee-Haw is my favorite TV show, do you guys think I could have avoided the lynch?

[BrianD]

That was an interesting turn of events. I wonder if this will turn out to be good or bad. Too bad Swaggs had to use his power so early. I guess he gets to be boring and normal now.

[hoopsguy]

I was dumb for not putting you on the Duke role - sorry for casting a vote that forced you to burn it although I'm hoping it works out well in the end.