After examining the events of last night, I have concluded that one of three things happened:
1.) Fuzzy is a bad guy and his saving was a result of a concentrated effort by a larger conspiracy of bad guys. If this is the case, the best action would be to off Fuzzy.
2.) Fuzzy is just a villager and his saving was the result of a coalition of bad guys attempting cast suspicion on him in order to cover their own tracks. The best action would be to let Fuzzy be and start investigating other suspicious persons.
3.) It was all just the standard Day One madness.
I'm leaning strongly toward option three, but I'll withhold my vote for a bit.
I'm also thinking option 3.
There are too many variables to make a vote for Fuzzy at the moment. We should just have a vig kill Fuzzy tonight. The guardian should agree not to protect him and that will be that. The village will get two kills in this event.
I can agree with Aldo's thinking. Some where in all the last minute vote switching is people doing evil things. We were warned bad things could happen if there was a tie, and people tried hard to make one.
It didn't sound like automatic bad things to me, just like something different. I like different.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
I can agree with Aldo's thinking. Some where in all the last minute vote switching is people doing evil things. We were warned bad things could happen if there was a tie, and people tried hard to make one.
It didn't sound like automatic bad things to me, just like something different. I like different.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
/shrug
An extra death always tends to hurt the village. At least in the long run from what I've seem.
Toxic Toys on
3DS code: 2938-6074-2306, Nintendo Network ID: ToxicToys, PSN: zutto
I think my actions Yesterday prove that I was trying to avoid a tie, not create one.
I don't see how events leading up to my vote switch can be interpreted in any other way.
Why did you vote for FCC tonight?
I mean, it seems like i created a small bandwagon, but it would be kind of silly to have it roll over you because of a bad reason.
Aldo on
0
Options
duraxWho watches the watchdogs?Registered Userregular
The OP say that ties are not in the best interest of the village, I acted to preserve the best interest of the village. If that is worth scorn, I can accept it (we don't know what the tied vote would have accomplished).
Voting for FCC for information doesn't seem dumb to me as I think there was a definite reaction to him being band wagoned, and if we learn his alignment that points to the likely alignment of those who tried to save him.
If there are better leads I am certainly willing to listen.
I can agree with Aldo's thinking. Some where in all the last minute vote switching is people doing evil things. We were warned bad things could happen if there was a tie, and people tried hard to make one.
It didn't sound like automatic bad things to me, just like something different. I like different.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
/shrug
An extra death always tends to hurt the village. At least in the long run from what I've seem.
I can agree with Aldo's thinking. Some where in all the last minute vote switching is people doing evil things. We were warned bad things could happen if there was a tie, and people tried hard to make one.
It didn't sound like automatic bad things to me, just like something different. I like different.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
/shrug
An extra death always tends to hurt the village. At least in the long run from what I've seem.
That's statistically unreasonable. We could either
gain one lead
or
kill off two leads in the same night instead of wasting two nights.
I really don't think day one anything can be taken seriously.
You are reading a lot into what was probably done strictly for lulz.
I agree that there is probably very little infromation to be mined out of Day1. Voting FCC off would test that thought and provide a measure of certainty.
I can agree with Aldo's thinking. Some where in all the last minute vote switching is people doing evil things. We were warned bad things could happen if there was a tie, and people tried hard to make one.
It didn't sound like automatic bad things to me, just like something different. I like different.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
/shrug
An extra death always tends to hurt the village. At least in the long run from what I've seem.
That's statistically unreasonable. We could either
gain one lead
or
kill off two leads in the same night instead of wasting two nights.
Really the only viable logic that one could find to disagree with what I have ascertained is that it is unusual and not a precedent in phalla. Why waste our vote when we've clearly decided who should be on the receiving end of it?
DasUberEdward on
0
Options
duraxWho watches the watchdogs?Registered Userregular
FCC was voted for initially because he was inactive (due to being at work all day). Then people joined on his bandwagon.
What would voting him off now possibly show? It's pretty much a random choice in my opinion.
My reasoning is that there was a reaction to his taking the bandwagon.
If we can determine FCC's alignnment (by voting for him or otherwise) it would strongly hint at the alignment of those who started the anti-bandwagon.
Durax your plan would make more sense if people seered on death. Fact is, they aren't - more than one person is going to die tonight and we're going to get a list of roles that aren't matched with the dead.
I don't think it will be as helpful as you think. Unless everyone who dies turns out to be all baddies or all good guys.
My point is that we can increase our odds of snaring a baddy. Let's face it the odds are in our favor so the loss of one extra person this night will hardly skew things this early in the game and more importantly it will prevent us from wasting a vote tomorrow.
Variable, and Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud don't seem to have posted yet.
Is he a baddie, I don't know. Does being at work all that time seem a valid excuse? And what about those late night swappers? What can that really tell us so far?
So far, its FCC with 9 votes, Durax with 7.
LewieP's Mummy on
For all the top UK Gaming Bargains, check out SavyGamer
Sorry to take the stage again, but I just have to point this out:
!retract Durax !WereHippy
Durax seems to follow some form of logic and he is right in that he did not cause confusion per say, but instead wanted to pull the votes out of the equilibrium. That means that, following my assumptions, Werehippy should be the target of our, otherwise unfounded, bandwagon.
--
DasUberEdward: we did not decide on anything last night: we tossed a fucking coin. There is no reason to go by last night's coin flip when we have more information to go on now.
Okay I've been asked a few times who my roomate was and it was mtvcdm.
We were planning to lay low day 1 and then possibly try and set out some plans for the following days. Of course, we never got the chance. I didn't really see any problem with outing myself today as there wasn't any network going and as of last night I am essentially just a villager.
Yes it's fair to say that any evil player could make that claim but then we haven't seen anyone else step forward to say otherwise. As with most masons, they have no powers other than the knowledge of someone else's identity, I would think that coming out and saying that said evil is lying is worth the risk if all that's being lost is a villager.
Sorry to take the stage again, but I just have to point this out:
!retract Durax !WereHippy
Durax seems to follow some form of logic and he is right in that he did not cause confusion per say, but instead wanted to pull the votes out of the equilibrium. That means that, following my assumptions, Werehippy should be the target of our, otherwise unfounded, bandwagon.
--
DasUberEdward: we did not decide on anything last night: we tossed a fucking coin. There is no reason to go by last night's coin flip when we have more information to go on now.
Right so it makes more sense to allot one death by the village choice instead of two? We know the vigilante is alive because of the reveals so why fucking waste it on another dumb fucking coin flip instead of deciding as a collective?
I only proposed an idea that would be beneficial to the village. We know that we must have at least a vigilante and a guardian alive. If the entire village comes to a majority conclusion then the vigilante and guardian should act to correspond with that decision. This can be done without compromising any identities and it provides us with an extra kill for the night to help direct our path.
I stated earlier that I am nothing more than a villager and I will again state my role. I am not important but while I am alive I would like to make a difference.
Right so it makes more sense to allot one death by the village choice instead of two? We know the vigilante is alive because of the reveals so why fucking waste it on another dumb fucking coin flip instead of deciding as a collective?
You are saying we should vote FCC because that's what we did yesterday, correct?
Why should we go by last night's rng? We have seen some very interesting events around vote close: people trying to create a tie and people kicking off the next bandwagon without second thought right after. In a previous post I have connected these two events in a coherent argument against Werehippy. I don't see why we should kill FCC instead. What makes you think he is dangerous to the village?
I only proposed an idea that would be beneficial to the village. We know that we must have at least a vigilante and a guardian alive. If the entire village comes to a majority conclusion then the vigilante and guardian should act to correspond with that decision. This can be done without compromising any identities and it provides us with an extra kill for the night to help direct our path.
I stated earlier that I am nothing more than a villager and I will again state my role. I am not important but while I am alive I would like to make a difference.
He fails. On his way home he nearly trips over the body of Greeper. The dead man's face is blue and there is a clear red ring around his neck. Fuzzy screams for help, and although a small crowd forms quickly, the Shrine Officials take longer to arrive.
When they do arrive, the Officials make quick work of Greeper’s body and haul it back to the Shrine. They were delayed, they explain, because they found the body of mtvcdm, eyeless and with his guts splayed all over the ground, just behind the Shrine.
Right so it makes more sense to allot one death by the village choice instead of two? We know the vigilante is alive because of the reveals so why fucking waste it on another dumb fucking coin flip instead of deciding as a collective?
You are saying we should vote FCC because that's what we did yesterday, correct?
Why should we go by last night's rng? We have seen some very interesting events around vote close: people trying to create a tie and people kicking off the next bandwagon without second thought right after. In a previous post I have connected these two events in a coherent argument against Werehippy. I don't see why we should kill FCC instead. What makes you think he is dangerous to the village?
I edited my post but i'm not implying that FCC should be the one to die. I'm just saying that the village should come to an early agreement based off of the events in the previous day to maximize our potential tonight.
Right so it makes more sense to allot one death by the village choice instead of two? We know the vigilante is alive because of the reveals so why fucking waste it on another dumb fucking coin flip instead of deciding as a collective?
You are saying we should vote FCC because that's what we did yesterday, correct?
Why should we go by last night's rng? We have seen some very interesting events around vote close: people trying to create a tie and people kicking off the next bandwagon without second thought right after. In a previous post I have connected these two events in a coherent argument against Werehippy. I don't see why we should kill FCC instead. What makes you think he is dangerous to the village?
I edited my post but i'm not implying that FCC should be the one to die. I'm just saying that the village should come to an early agreement based off of the events in the previous day to maximize our potential tonight.
Yeah, last minute shenanigans are annoying, no argument there.
I see the last-minute vote switching as more of day-1-no-leads-shenanigans than some concerted effort to force a tie.
It would be pretty stupid of the baddies to show their hand that publicly, but in past games I've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "I'd have to be stupid to ...." routine.
I'm more at a loss for any other lead to follow up on. It's either fuzzy for getting the save, or starting a huge brawler over one of the people who was involved in the last minute shenanigans, and I think there's a better chance of fuzzy being a baddy than of our hitting any possibilities among the list of last minute switches. Not great, but the best play I see at the moment.
Posts
Seriously.
I'm right.
"may or may not be worth finding out" intrigued me
I figured the first day would be a good day to find out, rather than later in the game when an extra death or something would really hurt
/shrug
...I can't believe you felt the need to repost that stupid plan. On the same page, no less.
An extra death always tends to hurt the village. At least in the long run from what I've seem.
I mean, it seems like i created a small bandwagon, but it would be kind of silly to have it roll over you because of a bad reason.
This is completely wrong.
I really don't think day one anything can be taken seriously.
You are reading a lot into what was probably done strictly for lulz.
That's statistically unreasonable. We could either
gain one lead
or
kill off two leads in the same night instead of wasting two nights.
I'll vote sometime before game 3 of the Stanley Cup Finals.
What would voting him off now possibly show? It's pretty much a random choice in my opinion.
It could be worse then just loosing 2 leads.
I for one wouldn't want to find out.
Then I might just be over think this.
If we can determine FCC's alignnment (by voting for him or otherwise) it would strongly hint at the alignment of those who started the anti-bandwagon.
I believe so, yes.
I don't think it will be as helpful as you think. Unless everyone who dies turns out to be all baddies or all good guys.
Is he a baddie, I don't know. Does being at work all that time seem a valid excuse? And what about those late night swappers? What can that really tell us so far?
So far, its FCC with 9 votes, Durax with 7.
For paintings in progress, check out canvas and paints
"The power of the weirdness compels me."
!retract Durax
!WereHippy
Durax seems to follow some form of logic and he is right in that he did not cause confusion per say, but instead wanted to pull the votes out of the equilibrium. That means that, following my assumptions, Werehippy should be the target of our, otherwise unfounded, bandwagon.
--
DasUberEdward: we did not decide on anything last night: we tossed a fucking coin. There is no reason to go by last night's coin flip when we have more information to go on now.
We were planning to lay low day 1 and then possibly try and set out some plans for the following days. Of course, we never got the chance. I didn't really see any problem with outing myself today as there wasn't any network going and as of last night I am essentially just a villager.
Yes it's fair to say that any evil player could make that claim but then we haven't seen anyone else step forward to say otherwise. As with most masons, they have no powers other than the knowledge of someone else's identity, I would think that coming out and saying that said evil is lying is worth the risk if all that's being lost is a villager.
Right so it makes more sense to allot one death by the village choice instead of two? We know the vigilante is alive because of the reveals so why fucking waste it on another dumb fucking coin flip instead of deciding as a collective?
I stated earlier that I am nothing more than a villager and I will again state my role. I am not important but while I am alive I would like to make a difference.
Why should we go by last night's rng? We have seen some very interesting events around vote close: people trying to create a tie and people kicking off the next bandwagon without second thought right after. In a previous post I have connected these two events in a coherent argument against Werehippy. I don't see why we should kill FCC instead. What makes you think he is dangerous to the village?
Raven kill.
I thought it was pretty obvious.
I edited my post but i'm not implying that FCC should be the one to die. I'm just saying that the village should come to an early agreement based off of the events in the previous day to maximize our potential tonight.
I.E. You and I got the mason roles, we would know about eachother and start the game off knowing our innocence.
Too bad one of the network seeds got obliterated Day 1.
Hooray for outside contact!
Ciao folks.
alright, thanks. semi-new phalla player up ins.
sucks that they got a special on day one :x
It would be pretty stupid of the baddies to show their hand that publicly, but in past games I've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "I'd have to be stupid to ...." routine.
I'm more at a loss for any other lead to follow up on. It's either fuzzy for getting the save, or starting a huge brawler over one of the people who was involved in the last minute shenanigans, and I think there's a better chance of fuzzy being a baddy than of our hitting any possibilities among the list of last minute switches. Not great, but the best play I see at the moment.
Stay ever vigilante.