Reminds me of porn stars in the 70’s.
hmmmm... I couldn't tell you what porn stars of any generation looked like, so I shall take you word for it. I knew there was a reason why I thought Nathan was dated and over-sexed.
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.
[WW] MRVille VIII: Something has Survived... GAME OVER, Vampires win!
- Thread starter jav6454
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
hmmmm... I couldn't tell you what porn stars of any generation looked like, so I shall take you word for it. I knew there was a reason why I thought Nathan was dated and over-sexed.
If they are actually playing, I'm sure they will.
For now, why aren't we figuring out what question we should ask ?
My thoughts on the question remain as they were at the beginning. We ask if there are any baddies amongst a small group (of 4 or 5) and then clear that. This late in the game infection is likely less of an issue which means we don't need to worry about cleared players suddenly becoming baddies.
Do we want to try to pick all non-baddies for the group (to clear people) or do we want to try to pick out the baddies ?
I'd like to try and pick out the baddies. If we can find 1 baddie in a small group of 4 or 5, it seems like it would be easier than clearing a group of 5 and than having to pick out a baddie from everyone who is left over.
We can come up with a list from the people that didn't vote for MBP on Day 1or those who voted for him very late. I'm not sure what to do with Day 2, because if mscriv wasn't bluffing than the top 2 vote getters are clear. And there weren't many votes after that.
This is from Stonyc:
Just figure I would point out that 4 or more at this point from this group is very high chance that a baddie will be in the group and would be a waste. It would need to be a much smaller number like 2-3
The only problem with defining the groups based on who did and didn't vote for mexbearbig is that it fails to take into account that we have two camps of baddies playing: vamps and werewolves. The vampires could well have been happy to get behind a vote that was showing no interest in them and are most likely amongst the MBP voters. Similarly if there was a move to infect a werewolf the most prudent course would likely be to choose that person from MBPs accusers as that might now move them beyond reproach.
I didn't vote for MBP and stated that we might be mistaken to vote him out, obviously I read things wrong. Am more than happy to be a subject of the question as I know I'm a goodie (and not just a simple villager).
Have I missed something or has the priest come forward?
I didn't vote for MBP and stated that we might be mistaken to vote him out, obviously I read things wrong. Am more than happy to be a subject of the question as I know I'm a goodie (and not just a simple villager).
Have I missed something or has the priest come forward?
I'm good with whatever the group decides, but we have to start somewhere. We need a way to narrow down the list. And looking for the other werewolf in the group that didn't vote for MBP is just one way. Hopefully we'll get more suggestions so when the priest does come forward we'll have something for him.
That's exactly why. When it's you or someone else, you just may say anything to defend yourself. I tend to believe mscriv is who he says he is but the alternative is merely a worthy possibility to bring up, particularly as Don't Panic turned out innocent. It's a paranoid game, almost anything is possible.
True. Or even regular villagers just happy to see incorrect attention taken off from them. It also forgets that plenty of innocent people just make mistakes.
I stuck to my gut instead of going with the herd but I was wrong. It really sucks when that happens because it makes you look guilty even when you're not. It was the first vote and it was a lucky hit.
As I said before, I think the priest's prayer would be good in the 3-4 names of the game's smallest contributors. It's a great strategy for baddies to hide in the silence and shadows. Taking that comfort zone away has to be a good thing. It may be the only way to get anything out of some players.
</My two pennies>
I can definitely understand sticking with your gut. I was also wrong about appleguy...and in the last game I was a target it seemed like every day because of my first vote. Half the village got lucky on the first day...and I just chose the wrong camp.
And as far as the list for the priest, I'm all for anything that will narrow down the names, and choosing the least active players would probably be the easiest as we wouldn't be starting with as high a number as with my suggestion. And at the very least we may get some more activity in here.
chrmjenkins 12/9/10 2:31 PM +91 hrs
philbeeney 12/10/10 0:12 AM +81 hrs
renewed 12/9/10 7:56 PM +85 hrs
By last post and the hours since that last post as of 9:46 AM. If there is an error, edit this post.
If they’re all villagers, this will not be good for us.
I didn't want to name names when I posted that inactive people should be posting... but now that they are out there, there are two possibilities:
1) They are inactive.
2) They appear inactive but instead may be Specials who have been PMing Jav6454 to maintain their active status.
I didn't want to call them out for fear of putting a target on their backs in case they were good Specials, but at this point, as inactive as they (appear) to be, we really have no choice but to call them out because their (apparent) inactivity compels us to do so.
And philbeeney, unless you are a Special that has been PMing Jav6454... your "Hello" post, if we follow the rules, counts for nothing as you have been inactive for greater than 80 hours at the time of your latest post. I guess it's up to Jav6454 to decide if you stay in the game if you are not a Special and have not been PMing him to stay in the game.
I guess we have nothing to do but wait and see if Jav6454 decides to off any of the three of renewed, phil or chrmjenkins...
I didn't want to name names when I posted that inactive people should be posting... but now that they are out there, there are two possibilities:
1) They are inactive.
2) They appear inactive but instead may be Specials who have been PMing Jav6454 to maintain their active status.
I didn't want to call them out for fear of putting a target on their backs in case they were good Specials, but at this point, as inactive as they (appear) to be, we really have no choice but to call them out because their (apparent) inactivity compels us to do so.
And philbeeney, unless you are a Special that has been PMing Jav6454... your "Hello" post, if we follow the rules, counts for nothing as you have been inactive for greater than 80 hours at the time of your latest post. I guess it's up to Jav6454 to decide if you stay in the game if you are not a Special and have not been PMing him to stay in the game.
I guess we have nothing to do but wait and see if Jav6454 decides to off any of the three of renewed, phil or chrmjenkins...
I know it's more work, but can you add a last public post column (show the post number) to your spreadsheet to make it easier to track ?
I didn't want to name names when I posted that inactive people should be posting... but now that they are out there, there are two possibilities:
1) They are inactive.
2) They appear inactive but instead may be Specials who have been PMing Jav6454 to maintain their active status.
I didn't want to call them out for fear of putting a target on their backs in case they were good Specials, but at this point, as inactive as they (appear) to be, we really have no choice but to call them out because their (apparent) inactivity compels us to do so.
And philbeeney, unless you are a Special that has been PMing Jav6454... your "Hello" post, if we follow the rules, counts for nothing as you have been inactive for greater than 80 hours at the time of your latest post. I guess it's up to Jav6454 to decide if you stay in the game if you are not a Special and have not been PMing him to stay in the game.
I guess we have nothing to do but wait and see if Jav6454 decides to off any of the three of renewed, phil or chrmjenkins...
I didnt list the three others who are rapidly approaching 80 hours also. Pretty sad.
Anyway, I can see how keeping up with this would be hard for jav.
I hesitate to do that because I don't want to paint a larger target on someone who might justifiably trying to lay low... plus, then we'll get a bunch of lynchings based on "OMG, Plutonius hasn't posted since post #231, and everyone else has averaged 3.77 posts since his last post... KILL HIM." I don't think inactivity alone should get someone killed (except when it gets excessive, and usually people are pretty good about spotting that in the course of the game anywas)... you're welcome to add to the document if you like, it's editable by anyone who clicks on the link. I just have personal reservations adding information like that.
We should all just out ourselves at this point... given a little more time, we could lose 1/3 of our players in one go.
I agree; we dont need this in the spreadsheet.
It remains to be seen if this 80 hour rule is going to help make people more active. It doesnt seem to have any effect in this game.
I don't understand this inactivity at all, especially with that 80 hour rule thing. Why sign up if you just don't care enough to play? One post every 3 days is hardly difficult. It's just bizarre.
The spreadsheet has gotten pretty complicated as is, hehe.
EDIT:
I agree. I can understand RL getting in the way of an online forum game... and I've been guilty in the past of being "inactive". If you really want to boil it down... this game requires a 2.1 posts in a single week, evenly spaced out to stay active (ignoring PMs for the moment).
Ouch, those are some pretty good players. I'd like to hear from Jav before the votes get rolling. If we lose anyone it has an impact on the game.