Whoever is holding up this game needs to be killed off.
Sorry to see you go ucfgrad. Did you want to be voted off? Busy or something?
Sorry to see you go ucfgrad. Did you want to be voted off? Busy or something?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Simple. Game over.
- Thread starter appleguy123
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, I didn't want to be voted off. I was with my son on a field trip and had a busy evening as well.
Ravenvii woke up to find the village exactly as he had left it. No one was dead. The hunter was successful again.
It is DAY. The deadline is 9pm tomorrow.
Sorry, I couldn't write a proper narrative. Today was terrible, and I fear how the narrative would turn out if I wrote it.
It is DAY. The deadline is 9pm tomorrow.
Sorry, I couldn't write a proper narrative. Today was terrible, and I fear how the narrative would turn out if I wrote it.
Ravenvii woke up to find the village exactly as he had left it. No one was dead. The hunter was successful again.
It is DAY. The deadline is 9pm tomorrow.
Sorry, I couldn't write a proper narrative. Today was terrible, and I fear how the narrative would turn out if I wrote it.
Wow. The Hunter is on fire. I guess they went after Joe again? He's like a cat. 2 lives down, 7 to go.
I'm sure that some of you will reflect that 2 hunters was a bad choice because it is too hard for the wolves. I'll just say now that only one hunter has been successful at all the whole game.
Now, is this game purely a team game. It seems as though it is simply Villagers against WereWolves. Is that right? There doesn't seem to be any way to differentiate the Villagers. If the Wolves are all killed off, then the remaining Villagers share in the victory equally, yes?
Okay, that being said, I am going to hope the Hunters have figured out a system to protect me. If they haven't, and there's a lapse in coverage, I will be WW-chow. I will confirm suspicions and ack to being The Seer.
I just hope that my identifying of Villagers doesn't cause them to be targeted by the WW. Would revealing a Hunter alter the game in such a way as to allow the WWs to win. Each Hunter has one auto-immunity, so which ones have already used it, if any, or what if the wolves attack someone I haven't cleared as a Hunter twice in a row in order to use up that auto-immunity. We don't really have any way to tell who the WWs have targeted, do we?
I have myself and a few others I can "clear" at this point. Would the Villagers trust me to simply clear people and only say when a WW has been identified? What about the lynchings? I would only vote for someone whom I haven't cleared, so I may be voting for an uncleared Villager or an unidentified Wolf. That essentially relegates some to having to accept the odds of being sacrificed.
Of course, if there is a lapse in Hunter coverage (I assume they don't know who the other is, and that they haven't been PM-ing each other), then my knowledge of who has been cleared is lost. Should I put out the cleared players names at the risk of making them WW targets?
I have some of my own thoughts on this, but I will put it out to The Village for their input.
I just hope that my identifying of Villagers doesn't cause them to be targeted by the WW. Would revealing a Hunter alter the game in such a way as to allow the WWs to win. Each Hunter has one auto-immunity, so which ones have already used it, if any, or what if the wolves attack someone I haven't cleared as a Hunter twice in a row in order to use up that auto-immunity. We don't really have any way to tell who the WWs have targeted, do we?
I have myself and a few others I can "clear" at this point. Would the Villagers trust me to simply clear people and only say when a WW has been identified? What about the lynchings? I would only vote for someone whom I haven't cleared, so I may be voting for an uncleared Villager or an unidentified Wolf. That essentially relegates some to having to accept the odds of being sacrificed.
Of course, if there is a lapse in Hunter coverage (I assume they don't know who the other is, and that they haven't been PM-ing each other), then my knowledge of who has been cleared is lost. Should I put out the cleared players names at the risk of making them WW targets?
I have some of my own thoughts on this, but I will put it out to The Village for their input.
Last edited:
As an impartial third person, the wolves know who the villagers are(because they are not wolves). It only serves to benefit villagers to reveal non specials. If you reveal the hunter, it would probably hurt you because the hunter would be wolf chow asap.
The hunters can't pm each other, so they can't work anything out.
Not that I object the help given, but this type of analysis should be made by playing players. It's part of the strategy to let the Seer know what or what not to reveal; therefor helping keep the Hunter's identity safe. This comes as fellow player.
Usually game gods don't clarify anything but the rules. Sorry to be blunt and harsh, but when others directed roles, they restrained from analysis like these and kept exclusively to answering rule-related questions only.
Again sorry if it seems blunt and harsh, but this is the point of this game, to allow us help the Seer find the wolves.
This is a tough one. Because knowing who is cleared would give the hunters some definites that they can protect. Though, I wouldn't out anyone as a hunter. I would keep the specials secret if I was in your position. The only downside is that every game there are always a few villagers the wolves keep around because they are always under suspicion. They act as sort of a shield at times. So outing one of those may cause them to target someone they may not have otherwise. But I think the benefits may outweigh that one con.
I do think that many will take your lead in the voting, knowing that you are voting for someone that hasn't been cleared.
Those are my thoughts at least. But I'm all for whatever everyone thinks will give us the best chance to find these last 2 wolves.
PS I'm at work and I keep getting interrupted, so forgive me if this isn't a grammatical masterpiece.
Just indicate who you scanned and if they are villagers or WS. We have absolutely no need to know if they are hunters (except in Jav's case since he is a WS trying to sniff out our hunters ).
I'm assuming you scanned Ravenvii the other turn and I'm betting you probably scanned lbro last turn (based on your vote). I think most people will hold off on voting till they get the results of your last scan.
As for me, I will start off the voting without waiting on the scan results (I'm assuming that you would have said something right away if you scanned a WS). For the same reasons as last turn, and the fact that Jav wants the hunter's names, I'm voting for Jav again.
).I'm assuming you scanned Ravenvii the other turn and I'm betting you probably scanned lbro last turn (based on your vote). I think most people will hold off on voting till they get the results of your last scan.
As for me, I will start off the voting without waiting on the scan results (I'm assuming that you would have said something right away if you scanned a WS). For the same reasons as last turn, and the fact that Jav wants the hunter's names, I'm voting for Jav again.
Just indicate who you scanned and if they are villagers or WS. We have absolutely no need to know if they are hunters (except in Jav's case since he is a WS trying to sniff out our hunters
I'm assuming you scanned Ravenvii the other turn and I'm betting you probably scanned lbro last turn (based on your vote). I think most people will hold off on voting till they get the results of your last scan.
As for me, I will start off the voting without waiting on the scan results (I'm assuming that you would have said something right away if you scanned a WS). For the same reasons as last turn, and the fact that Jav wants the hunter's names, I'm voting for Jav again.
I don't want the Seer to give out the Hunter's name. I explicitly state that.
However, I quit the game. After that last stunt, I don't believe this game is decided by players.
Also, 2 hunters is too much for the number of players and I don't recall reading that in the OP before the game started; 3 wolves is also too much.
I don't think its fair for all players at this point (wolves or villagers). BTW, act if I left the village. However, I'd like my true role should be left unknown. If the game god decided this isn't the case, I won't mind.
Cheers fellows....
Also, 2 hunters is too much for the number of players and I don't recall reading that in the OP before the game started; 3 wolves is also too much.
I don't think its fair for all players at this point (wolves or villagers). BTW, act if I left the village. However, I'd like my true role should be left unknown. If the game god decided this isn't the case, I won't mind.
Cheers fellows....
I think you should reveal the villagers you have scanned but don't tell us if they are hunters. What appleguy123 said is right, with the hunter killed we would have had two extra dead villagers so please don't reveal their role. Just say whos a villager so the list can get narrowed down. I'll wait till you post again before casting a vote.
Ignore him. He get huffy from time to time.
As in "I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down"
.
As in "I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down"
Bwah hah hah that was a very clever way to infer he may be a WW, lol
If he's really quitting, are we going to vote him out? Or just let him leave and start voting for someone else?
What is all this talk about voting people off who aren't playing? This was done in the beginning and some of you wanted to vote Neko girl off next. She's obviously not playing as well. Want to vote her off too after you're done with jav and waste a vote? It doesn't help the village one bit.
Edit: Of course, it's not a waste if you think one of these players is a WW.
Well, lots of stuff going on apparently and some prime-time drama too.
it's going to be a long post, so you can skip directly to the last line if you want (ok, melrose?)
First off, sorry to see Ucfgrad93 go (see, I spelled it right!). Not surprised that you were a peasant, but with 2 wolves and 10 peasants (now 9) some misfires were to be expected. If anything, we are doing average: 3/16 at the beginning, and we got 1/5 dead people.
Of course we have to thank the hunter(s) who saved 3 kills so far (very impressive job!) and eldiablojoe for pinpointing Nies, otherwise we could be O for 8.
--
I gotta say I was pleased but quite surprised that eldiablo wasnt offed last night, as I didnt think the hunter(s) was going to be able to protect him again.
Actually I thought we only had one hunter remaining, but I am glad I was wrong (that, or the the wolves made some serious mistakes, well know at the end when Appleguy gives us the details).
If the hunters lucked out in alternating protecting Eldiablo (meaning one protected him last night, one tonight) they can keep it up for a while, without need to go public, which is a big plus for the village.
Of course this is assuming that eldiablo is indeed the seer. If he is (and it seems almost certain now nice new avatar, BTW) as other mentioned he should obviously not identify the hunters as such, but at most only as villagers.
This doesnt add any info to what the wolves know already, but clearly help in voting.
The only downside I see in identify the cleared peasants (again, no reason to tell the hunter if you find one) is that they become automatic wolf targets, as the wolves have no interest in keeping around the cleared villagers who vote but dont get voted. Of course wolves should be targeting you, so that could be less of an issue
The major downsides with not identifying them right away (opposed to, for example, only clearing them when they get close to be lynched), is that
a) you keep us running in cricles when things could be sped up and
b) if for whatever reason you die, the information dies with you
---
In regard to the number of wolves/hunters, I dont know when the OP was updated with that specific information, but it was indicated clearly before the game and during the game (posts 81-88, post 105 and again post 171, by appleguy, plus various post from other people)
Finally, although I agree that game-modgods should try to refrain to affect the games and post commentary-ish posts (and write clearer rules ) , I think appleguys post hardly qualify as a stunt, as he just gave some obvious clarification, which also immediately came from multiple posters.
Certainly, many act of modgods have occurred before that affected the games in various occasions (shifting deadlines, new interpretations, changes of rules, modgod-killings, et cetera, as documented in plutonius trilogy of philosophical blockbusters: Where ModGod Went Wrong, Some More of ModGod's Greatest Mistakes, and Who Is This ModGod Person, Anyway? ), and I have complained more than my share, but I think we can always assume good faith on the part of the modgod
meanwhile, waiting for an inspired word from eldiablo, i'll go with moyank24 again
it's going to be a long post, so you can skip directly to the last line if you want (ok, melrose?
)First off, sorry to see Ucfgrad93 go (see, I spelled it right!
). Not surprised that you were a peasant, but with 2 wolves and 10 peasants (now 9) some misfires were to be expected. If anything, we are doing average: 3/16 at the beginning, and we got 1/5 dead people. Of course we have to thank the hunter(s) who saved 3 kills so far (very impressive job!) and eldiablojoe for pinpointing Nies, otherwise we could be O for 8.
--
I gotta say I was pleased but quite surprised that eldiablo wasnt offed last night, as I didnt think the hunter(s) was going to be able to protect him again.
Actually I thought we only had one hunter remaining, but I am glad I was wrong (that, or the the wolves made some serious mistakes, well know at the end when Appleguy gives us the details).
If the hunters lucked out in alternating protecting Eldiablo (meaning one protected him last night, one tonight) they can keep it up for a while, without need to go public, which is a big plus for the village.
Of course this is assuming that eldiablo is indeed the seer. If he is (and it seems almost certain now nice new avatar, BTW
) as other mentioned he should obviously not identify the hunters as such, but at most only as villagers.This doesnt add any info to what the wolves know already, but clearly help in voting.
The only downside I see in identify the cleared peasants (again, no reason to tell the hunter if you find one) is that they become automatic wolf targets, as the wolves have no interest in keeping around the cleared villagers who vote but dont get voted. Of course wolves should be targeting you, so that could be less of an issue
The major downsides with not identifying them right away (opposed to, for example, only clearing them when they get close to be lynched), is that
a) you keep us running in cricles when things could be sped up and
b) if for whatever reason you die, the information dies with you
---
In regard to the number of wolves/hunters, I dont know when the OP was updated with that specific information, but it was indicated clearly before the game and during the game (posts 81-88, post 105 and again post 171, by appleguy, plus various post from other people)
Finally, although I agree that game-modgods should try to refrain to affect the games and post commentary-ish posts (and write clearer rules
) , I think appleguys post hardly qualify as a stunt, as he just gave some obvious clarification, which also immediately came from multiple posters. Certainly, many act of modgods have occurred before that affected the games in various occasions (shifting deadlines, new interpretations, changes of rules, modgod-killings, et cetera, as documented in plutonius trilogy of philosophical blockbusters: Where ModGod Went Wrong, Some More of ModGod's Greatest Mistakes, and Who Is This ModGod Person, Anyway? ), and I have complained more than my share, but I think we can always assume good faith on the part of the modgod
meanwhile, waiting for an inspired word from eldiablo, i'll go with moyank24 again
The problem is that this may just be a ploy so we don't vote for him.
The only way we can figure out who is a WS is by looking at the voting pattern and the results of the voting. We are a fair ways into the game and it's somewhat important to know if Jav is a WS or not.
At the very least if Jav quits and we don't vote him out, we should know if he was a WS or not.