View Topic

DEAD

My task was completed. I may rest in peace.

@Gerrick you’ve been awfully quiet.

That is a worrying death.  Now to see other conversations before voicing my suspicions.

@Gerrick you’ve been awfully quiet.

Yeah, I work long hours on the weekends, and my wife took today off, so I haven't had much of a chance to really go back and reread in a bit. But I should be able to later this evening and come up with a suspicion list.

Ok, went back through it all. Both reread the thread and read each person's posts through their profiles. Here's my suspicion list.

1. Ruguo: D1 voted Doc; D2 voted self (after pointing out that nobody had voted and then several others already voted for themselves); D3 voted Aragonn. Had a long analysis on the N1 kill (taulover), which seemed kinda fake to me. Talks a lot about possibility of accidentally saying something wrong, which seems like they're just trying to preemptively cover their tracks in the case that they do say something revealing. Somehow knew either Doc and/or Laurentus was a wolf, though they now don't believe Doc is a wolf because of their reaction test (and not the fact that Doc helped kill Laurentus)? Their posts just read strangely to me, given the info we know so far (Laurentus wolf, Aragonn town).

2. HappySpin: Very inactive. D1 vote for self; D2 did not post/vote; D3 voted for Hydra (almost certainly town) and said we need to lynch to see voting patterns -- why hadn't they voted to lynch anyone prior? Claimed to be an experienced Werewolf player yet hasn't shown off anything -- methinks they're just trying to lay low.

3. Kane: D1 did not post/vote; D2 vote for self; D3 sorta defended Aragonn but then didn't vote alongside him for Laurentus who had the second most number of votes (voted for me instead since "the way I voted has got him suspicious"). Hasn't really been taking a stance on anything (besides his vote for me last day phase). Seems like he's trying to do anything but rock the boat.

4. El Fiji Grande: Very inactive. D1 did not post/vote; D2 did not vote; D3 sorta defended Aragonn but then didn't vote alongside him for Laurentus who had the second most number of votes (voted for Melehan instead).

5. Melehan: D1 voted self; D2 did not post/vote; D3 went pretty hard in voting for Aragonn, which at first seems very suspicious since Laurentus was a wolf, but to me it just seems a little too conspicuous a play for him to also be a wolf.

6. Doc: Wouldn't put it past Laurentus to sacrifice himself to ensure Doc's innocence, but I don't think that's the case (but then again, I believed Laurentus to be town, too, so I don't know -- hence why he's still on the list).

Not suspicious: Wintermoot, Hydra, Red Mones

Not at all certain (got a 33% chance of choosing a wolf), but here we go. Vote: Ruguo

*looks at that gigantic target being painted on Hydra*

o___o

That's a great analysis, Gerrick, and I think I agree with you on Ruguo, but I'll hold off on voting for now. @HappySpin, @El Fiji Grande, anything to say?

@Gerrick, you voted for Aragonn as well with little to no explanation. Surely you didn't actually believe he was admitting to being a wolf?

Right now, my main suspicions are Doc and Gerrick.

Doc I believed I at least touched on last night. He's the person who first selected Aragonn for lynching last round, flipped to voting for Laurentus when suspicion was starting to cast their way, then almost immediately after the phase started taking credit for exposing a wolf. He even went so far as to say "I think 'Doc is not scum' can just be assumed at this point considering the immensity of that flip". He obviously wants to be given a pass for the rest of the game...is he truly the hero of the round, or did he throw his fellow wolf off the bus to save himself from further scrutiny? Methinks you doth praise thyself too much.

On the other hand, for the first two rounds Gerrick casts seemingly random votes for other people at a time when many people were voting for themselves. Perhaps that by itself isn't horribly suspicious, but then in the last round he absolutely latches onto the Aragonn pile with an uncharacteristic glee, acting completely certain that Aragonn was the wolf when, as we know now, he really wasn't.

Interestingly enough, Doc thinks Gerrick is a wolf. They both think Ruguo is a wolf. I suppose that means they both would like us to vote them off this round, though Doc hasn't voted yet to confirm that (I'm going off his post last round where he switched his vote to Laurentus). Gerrick has already posted his thoughts...I will wait to hear from Doc and Ruguo before voting this round. But that's where my thoughts are at the moment.

I think what's important is to look back at who was pushing for Aragonn's lynching. It's not much to go off of, but it's all I feel we have. The people voting Aragonn were: Doc, Melehan, Laurentus, Red Mones, Gerrick, and Ruguo. I'm not sure if there could be two wolves in that pile (one being Laurentus, of course), but it strikes me that we should give these votes closer examination.

Doc was early to the party voting on Aragonn, but flipped at the last minute to catch Laurentus. I dismiss the thinking of others that such a move could be a false-flag move to decrease suspicion on Doc. The odds of this strategy paying off would be exceptionally low.

Melehan was an adamant Aragonn voter, and became quite defensive when I initially raised my suspicion of him. I understand his earlier point that Aragonn was the second vote on two different stacks, but Melehan was completely dismissive that the same was true of him. My argument to vote against him yesterday was founded in that reasoning. Given how hard he went on Aragonn, I continue to have reason to suspect him.

Red Mones gave very little reasoning for his Aragonn vote, simply stating that many others had been suspicious of Aragonn, leading him to Agree. He later retracted the vote based on my reasoning that the Aragonn pile likely contained at least one wolf, but then re-voted for Aragonn on the idea that it would at least provide information.

Gerrick voted jokingly at first, and did not retract it, though he later explained that Aragonn's fate was sealed, prompting him to remain on target much like Red Mones. But while Red Mones wavered in his thinking, Gerrick's 'joke' vote provided him cover. Maybe that was intentional.

Ruguo's vote for Aragonn was based on revenge for having previously voted against him, and seemed based more on that emotion than on actual reasoning. He explains Aragonn's combativeness as a reflection of Laurentus, which I think holds water, but then jumps to the conclusion that Aragonn must have been hiding something. I suppose he was...

Based on that analysis, I'd say the ranking of suspicion of these players is, with 1 being most suspicious:
1. Gerrick
2. Melehan
3. Ruguo

I will vote Gerrick.

Great analysis as well, but I just want to clarify some small things. You stated, “He later retracted the vote based on my reasoning”. While this is technically correct, I just want to clarify I retracted my vote nearly a full hour before your post, and mentioned the idea that there may be a wolf on the bandwagon contributed to my retraction. I had doubts about the arguments for lynching Aragonn as well. I also voted for Laurentus in the end.

Melehan was an adamant Aragonn voter, and became quite defensive when I initially raised my suspicion of him. I understand his earlier point that Aragonn was the second vote on two different stacks, but Melehan was completely dismissive that the same was true of him. My argument to vote against him yesterday was founded in that reasoning. Given how hard he went on Aragonn, I continue to have reason to suspect him.

1) Yesterday was the FIRST time I was the second vote in a stack. That's not the same as being the second vote in a stack twice early in the game with no provided reasoning. Yet you keep making it out like I'm hiding a second stack vote and provided no reasons for my votes, neither of which are true.

2) I was really pushing for Aragonn in part because he was really pushing for me. He even stated that he was trying to discredit me. If anyone had reasons to be suspicious of Aragonn that day, it was me. Interestingly enough, after Lau got the majority of votes and was revealed to be a wolf, Aragonn backed off and became a lot less defensive.

3) I was asleep when all the really interesting stuff went down, so it wasn't like I could have changed my vote then.

With that said, with how Fiji has been using the same faulty reasoning to try to paint me as a wolf since D3, how he's the one who propsed that the other two wolves were in on the pile (which I find unlikely this early in the game), and how killing Aragonn essentially places suspicion onto everyone who voted for Aragonn while deflecting it away from everyone else, Fiji tops my list of suspicious persons.

I'm going to wait and see what everyone else has to say though before casting my vote.

To clarify, I wasn't presenting my analysis of those who voted for Aragonn yesterday as an end-all-be-all list of everyone whom I'm suspicious of. It's a logical flaw to say that that analysis shifts blame away from people who voted differently yesterday, as I think it's incredibly unlikely that all three wolves were part of the pile on Aragonn. Naturally, there's at least one other person floating around. Simply put, as multiple people have mentioned, analyzing voting patterns can provide useful information, and given that this was a close, major vote, I believed it to be worthy of closer inspection.

Moreover, Melehan, I said in my post that I already understand your first point; placing additional emphasis on it now only reinforces my point about how dismissive you are of that irony. That's all. And to your point 3, I've got work from 8 - 17 and typically sleep from 22 - 7, so I also don't have a whole lot of time to revise my statements. And Red Mones - point taken; sorry I missed your last vote switch. I think if anything that would make you more believably innocent.

@Gerrick, you voted for Aragonn as well with little to no explanation. Surely you didn't actually believe he was admitting to being a wolf?

No, that was obviously a joke reason for voting for him, but his "admission" could very well have been a way to make people feel guilty and vote/change votes away from him as that's a common defense tactic. And I stand by my reasoning that lynching him would have given very useful info (which you yourself agreed with before retracting your vote) as when it's down to two suspicious people attacking each other, one of them dying gives a wealth of info and pretty strong indicators. I also had not been paying all that much attention since there were only 2 days in which mostly everyone voted for themselves (something I don't think I'll ever do in a game since it gives nothing to go off), so I wrongly leaned towards Laurentus' logic as well as the others who were also voting Aragonn rather than Aragonn himself.

On the other hand, for the first two rounds Gerrick casts seemingly random votes for other people at a time when many people were voting for themselves. Perhaps that by itself isn't horribly suspicious, but then in the last round he absolutely latches onto the Aragonn pile with an uncharacteristic glee, acting completely certain that Aragonn was the wolf when, as we know now, he really wasn't.

As I said before, I don't think I'll ever/have ever voted for myself/no lynch. I had (apparently wrongly) thought it's been well agreed that voting no lynch is just a way for the wolves to kill at night without much to go on during the day. Also, I did not "act completely certain that Aragonn was the wolf". At first I gave a joking reason to vote with the Aragonn wagon since I thought the reasoning by others had been pretty well laid out. When asked to clarify, I said that regardless of whether or not Aragonn is a wolf, his death would give us info on who likely is (since that's the game). At the point of my vote, Aragonn had by far the most votes, and it was not until later that there was a counter-bandwagon against Laurentus -- if I had changed my vote at the last minute to kill Laurentus and he was a town, I think it would've made me and Aragonn look 100% like wolves, and since Laurentus didn't seem any more a wolf than Aragonn, the risk didn't seem worth it.

Yes, I will be joining the Gerrick wagon, but first hear me out as to why. This is not an OMGUS vote, if it was I would have let 2am brain do this.

Scumspects:

Gerrick: You were silent up until this round, latching on to the Aragonn train on a joke and then refusing to move. You claim you were busy, but you suddenly have enough time to attack and rebuttal now, as if the main antagonizer of your group is gone and someone had to step up. You accusations at me seem like a mismosh of accusations that people have thrown at me in the past, hoping something hits and sticks. I did not somehow know Lau was a wolf, what gave you that idea? I had him as a scumspect, and doc as a scumspect IF and hinging on IF lau was a wolf.

Mones: Gut says something is wrong here. You're agreeing with everyone, flopping around a bit too much. Gerrick makes a good point about kane not really taking a stand on anything, but you're doing the same. Given what I can remember from playing with you before, you aren't usually this agreeable. It's as if you're trying to come off as a follower. I don't like it, I don't trust it, please form some opinions of your own.

Neutrals:

Doc: I don't trust you, I want to look into you more, but there is no real reason not to trust you right now. Problem being there is no real reason to trust you, either.

Melehan: I got no strong opinion on them. Just melehan being melehan.

Fiji: Mild distrust at this point, calls my plays based on emotion. They were based on midnight brain, mostly, but fair points. Don't like the subtle targeting of other players you seem to be weaving into your posts. Neutral status hinges on your willingness to vote Gerrick, who is not sitting right with me at all. Could be a bus play though... I have no idea why I'm keeping you in this section other than gut, actually.

Moot: No good reason to distrust, no good reason to trust. I like his logic though.

Safe:

Hydra: Enough said

If I forgot you, I don't have enough from you to even place you at this point. I think Happyspin and Kane fall into that hole.

You now have my thoughts. Please ask questions if you have them. I realize I am only human and will probably have made some logic errors.

Vote: Gerrick