By the way, you guys interrupted my attempt to get to sleep, and I dislike you for that... You know who you are.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
That's it. I'm tired. Everybody listen to Vainglory. Always and forever.
UNVOTE ESEMESAS
VOTE MALUROUS
If I'm wrong then I get egg on my face. But I won't let that stop me. Never be afraid of failure, as my mom always told me, always be bold and decisive. Therefore, I will make no more vote switches for the rest of this game, in any way shape or form.
EVERYBODY GO AFTER MALUROUS, WHO IS A PACKMATE OF BAGRICULA, AND AN UGLY PERSON!
UNVOTE ESEMESAS
VOTE MALUROUS
If I'm wrong then I get egg on my face. But I won't let that stop me. Never be afraid of failure, as my mom always told me, always be bold and decisive. Therefore, I will make no more vote switches for the rest of this game, in any way shape or form.
EVERYBODY GO AFTER MALUROUS, WHO IS A PACKMATE OF BAGRICULA, AND AN UGLY PERSON!
The standard approach I've seen (and followed) the games I've played has been:
1. Vote randomly
2. Consolidate on 2 or 3 tied candidates (I've tended to prefer 3)
3. Scrutinize any vote shifts that occur thereafter
However, I haven't seen any sensible proposals on how the Village can avoid damaging ties this way. Moreover, if the Village is disciplined...or more specifically if the talkers are disciplined, there's very little shade to lure out wolfy vote shifting. This naturally pushes any information back to the transition between (1) and (2) i.e. consolidation where there is sufficient cover for wolves to manipulate with plausible deniability.
Apart from the aforementioned issue with tie-breaking, I haven't noticed this generating enough vote shifts or enough new information. I suspect the orthodoxy has starved the room of oxygen and the wolves are settled in leaving their manipulations to stage (2). My experiment is to provide them with the illusion of cover through systematic dynamism (so the information can be recovered with a little extra work).
Generally though I'm highly suspicious of most people's analysis. Not because I think they've ulterior motives, but because I think they're grossly overconfident.
1. Vote randomly
2. Consolidate on 2 or 3 tied candidates (I've tended to prefer 3)
3. Scrutinize any vote shifts that occur thereafter
However, I haven't seen any sensible proposals on how the Village can avoid damaging ties this way. Moreover, if the Village is disciplined...or more specifically if the talkers are disciplined, there's very little shade to lure out wolfy vote shifting. This naturally pushes any information back to the transition between (1) and (2) i.e. consolidation where there is sufficient cover for wolves to manipulate with plausible deniability.
Apart from the aforementioned issue with tie-breaking, I haven't noticed this generating enough vote shifts or enough new information. I suspect the orthodoxy has starved the room of oxygen and the wolves are settled in leaving their manipulations to stage (2). My experiment is to provide them with the illusion of cover through systematic dynamism (so the information can be recovered with a little extra work).
Generally though I'm highly suspicious of most people's analysis. Not because I think they've ulterior motives, but because I think they're grossly overconfident.
I never voted for you, so that should maybe tell you something. Anyway, tunnel vision? I pointed out one situation - that we haven't even seen - where you'd be interesting. That's the only thing I ever said about you. I've probably accused most of the players here more than I have you, and that wasn't faulty analysis, you're just overreacting to a very innocent comment. Which is, of course, interesting.
Like I've said, that was my only option. Either leave it open for a tie or vote for Taii. But I don't get why you're so defensive seeing that I never really pointed at you.
EDIT: Joeb, you're just losing this. Your choice. 'ck it.
Unvote Vainglory
Vote Malurous
Why? Because he has been a most uncommunicative accused packmate...really I'd expect at least a single PM if I were a wolf. Will need to change my play style now that I've acquired a pack.
Vote Malurous
Why? Because he has been a most uncommunicative accused packmate...really I'd expect at least a single PM if I were a wolf. Will need to change my play style now that I've acquired a pack.
Also, why hasn't Vainglory caught fire yet when he's so obviously EVIL?
Vainglory, are you secretly my packmate as well?
Vainglory, are you secretly my packmate as well?
Hey now. I have a very low self-esteem, and constantly encourage people to make their own analysis. That isn't going to prevent me from trying to come up with the best analysis I can come up with! (Often times wrong, sometimes right).
If you're not talking about me, then I agree that a couple people are grossly overconfident, but I think most people here are usually reasonable, and the best way to drown out unreasonable analysis is for more people to come up with their own independent analysis, and see who is commonly brought up.
...
...
That said, we're on the last day. Every single villager needs to vote for ONE person, or else the wolves can easily steamroll somebody else. Unfortunately, we're in too deep a hole for the village to play effectively. Therefore, as suboptimal as it may normally be, EVERYBODY NEEDS TO VOTE MALUROUS.
And if we lose, you can all blame me (even though it's all randakar's and reis's fault).
There's a slight chance that Bagricula is not Malurous's packmate, but instead a chew-toy. Malurous was ready to sacrifice the chew-toy, but when he saw the chance to preserve it, he moved onto Taiisatai, so that we waste time on the chew-toy today. When Esemesas came up instead, he leaves the chew-toy in reserve.
But it does seem much more likely that there's a Malurous, Bagricula, Jopi pack. Notice that you and Randy suggested Bag and Jopi as targets: I followed onto Jopi initially, when no one else did. Malurous then popped up and campaigned pretty hard to get me run up, although he did vote for Bagricula. He can't accuse a JL member of being a wolf, so instead he accuses the only Jopi voter... I wonder why he was so unhappy with Bagricula and Jopi as targets? Funny too that he accuses me of being inconsistent in doubting that Bagricula's a wolf but voting for him anyway, when he does precisely the same - at least, his shift off Bagricula would seem to indicate he isn't certain Bagricula's a wolf. When Randakar provided the opening, Jopi jumped ship first, and then Malurous followed. Jopi would have been safest keeping his vote on the frontrunner, not switching, so that's very odd. Malurous moves too, and suddenly his campaign on me eases up... just when the two targets he didn't like have faded from view.
I'm a bit torn between Mal and Bag: the case against Mal is largely based on saving Bagricula, since that's what drew attention to him. But Bagricula might just be a chew toy to distract the village, and Mal was ready to save him. I'd go for Bagricula, but Malurous somehow seems the safer option.
Vote Bagricula
Did I date your daughter or something? It's usually parents who accuse me of being evil. I'll be fair - they're right. But I am not a vulf.
Are we secretly in an alliance in Diplomacy?
Okay people. Do you use Skype? I'm online right now (nick is malurous, surprise), it's 7:00 am. local time as you can see on any world clock, and I'm drunk as hell (as you can deduce by the fact that I'm not sleeping). Come on and interrogate me. I'm a drunk guy whose first language isn't English. Ask me anything, you'll see that I'm not lying.
Someone do this. I would, but I'm in an office that cannot handle this level of awesomeness.
- I never campaigned to run you up, you're inventing that. Though now I suspect that I should have.
- I wasn't happy with Baggy and Jopi, I voted for the former until I had no choice.
- I switched off Baggy to Taii because I had to leave and tie was death.
- What campaign? Like I said, you're inventing stuff.
Okay gosh darn it (to quote Ned Flanders). If there's actually a villager out there, do something here or call me by :45 to see how 100% genuine I am and vote someone useful. If no-one does anything by then I'll go to sleep and a frickin' Stalingrad won't be my fault.
Don't have skype, alas, otherwise I would ask you.
And if you weren't campaigning against me, what's this?
There's more than that. Seemed to me like you were gunning for me. And at least you admit you didn't want to lynch Jopi or Bagricula. Funny how when I vote Bagricula despite misgivings (but with good reason nonetheless) you call me out, but when you do it, it's okay...
And if you weren't campaigning against me, what's this?
There's more than that. Seemed to me like you were gunning for me. And at least you admit you didn't want to lynch Jopi or Bagricula. Funny how when I vote Bagricula despite misgivings (but with good reason nonetheless) you call me out, but when you do it, it's okay...
It's saying what would be interesting if Bagricula is lynched and turns out to be a villager. Alas, he wasn't lynched. So it means absolutely nothing currently.
Where? I see no situation where I had anything against voting for either of them.
I did not call you out (even if I suspect now that I should have) for voting him. I pretty much didn't call you out at all, but if I did it's calling out your wordings, not what you actually did.
You don't say. Oh well, you can't say that I didn't try. 'ckety 'ck.
(Hey, it's the Paradox forum so "ck" naturally means Crusader Kings. No profanity to see here!)
So why didn't you assist in lynching Bagricula if you wanted to find out? I gave enough good reasons, even with my hesitation, to lynch him. Instead you dwell on the fact that I moved onto Bagricula reluctantly and say if he dies, I'm the wolf. That's hedging your bets. Just to get the chew-toy out of the way was a good enough reason, but instead you pick at other threads until you get the chance to jump ship.
The mere fact that you put your vote on Bagricula but not Jopi says you didn't want to vote Jopi. And your vote on Bagricula was hedged with qualifications, and you moved off once it was safe to do so.
It's pretty clear that you were setting up a situation where anything I did was the wrong thing. You said it was suspicious to vote someone I wasn't convinced was a wolf - but you did the same. And at least I had the reason that I thought it best to clear the air so that we could have a clean slate today. Instead everyone went on a wild goose chase when I was asleep. Credit where due, I suppose you have pointed to those who participated in the sudden swing (Randy) - Jopi, Bag, Ese - but you were in on the swing too. Heck if you'd thrown your vote on Bagricula with confidence instead of uncertainty, and hadn't kept picking elsewhere, it probably would have gone through. Your behavior just sets off alarm bells for me, and now you say we shouldn't lynch you, well what is your suggestion?