|
Post by Setsusa on May 24, 2013 19:53:04 GMT -8
I agree with that in principle AL. I've no problem if we are hesitant and make sure to lynch wisely. The almost lynch we had yesterDay would not have been wise in my opinion as it was looking very forced.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 24, 2013 20:02:58 GMT -8
I generally agree with Sets' case as well, especially the hammer vote comment. It doesn't seem overly realistic to me that the Joker would risk suspicion to take out an innocent when they'd be just as happy with the town not lynching as a general policy. Agreed on the voting for this round too-seems like an 'out-of-the-gate vote' is not something Taelac generally has a problem with and is also less consequential overall than a vote later on. But from a rogue perspective not voting makes sense because you don't alienate any townies and you decrease the chance of there being a lynch at all.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 24, 2013 20:04:06 GMT -8
Anyway, if it doesn't happen today it's not the end of the world, and if people want to just go to bed they should. But I'm currently in favor of a Taelac lynch.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 24, 2013 20:06:43 GMT -8
Leif You say you hate to lose another day, but do you? What I don't like is feeling passive. I wanna feel like we're going after rogues rather than being picked off one by one until it's 2-1 or whatever and then the remainder trying to get it right. Part of me thinks getting to the end game with people handpicked by the Rogue isn't likely to work out well.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 24, 2013 20:07:01 GMT -8
Sets, you first said you thought I was more likely to be a rogue than Seastar, but then the opposite.
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on May 24, 2013 20:10:06 GMT -8
We then get to the above quoted post. Taelac hasn't mentioned all of the players in the game at the time of this post... That is not true. By that point, I had made "at least a small mention" of everyone, because I had already previously stated who I would and would not consider voting for. As for the bit about the hammer vote...yes, the hammer vote carries some suspicion, even if it's cast to lynch for information or in agreement with one's own voting. It would be foolish not to take a second look at the person who cast that vote. My game play to delay answering your question until you had answered mine was a function of your having refused to answer direct questions in past games. It was entirely motivated by the economics of ROMS, which requires trading information. As with any other kind of trade, when you know you're dealing with someone with a reputation for skipping the tab, you make sure you get your coin before you pour their drink.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 24, 2013 20:16:15 GMT -8
Fine, we'll play it that way Tae.
Yes, AL. I changed my mind today while thinking about it. It just doesn't seem likely that a rogue would make the mistake you did. It seems even less likely they'd do it on purpose as the fallout is very unpredictable.
Fair enough, Tae. You had mentioned everyone in some small regard. Your reasons are still a mystery on most players. That'd be like saying that my post where I grouped people into innocent, neutral and watch was overly telling. I "mentioned" them but I didn't talk about them.
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on May 24, 2013 20:22:30 GMT -8
So, what we appear to have is AL and Sets think I'm a rogue, Leif and I aren't sure what to think and are kind of stuck on the relative lack of momentum of the day, Aethera has resigned (and is therefore presumed innocent, since Furare hasn't showed up to end the game) and Seastar...hasn't posted all day.
Sea's usually a once a day poster and might show up between now and the deadline, but that once a day posting has been a great place for rogue Sea to take cover before. If a rogue is going to hope to coast to the end game, it's not one of the four of us who've played the round...
Vote: Seastar
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 24, 2013 20:24:28 GMT -8
I'm not actually adverse to vote off a non-poster at this point. It does sorta rub me the wrong way.
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on May 24, 2013 20:31:25 GMT -8
Okay, Mr. Tae is starting to look pointedly at the clock, so I'm for bed. Que sera sera.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 24, 2013 20:40:55 GMT -8
Hard to say if voting Seastar is rogue Tae's only move or just Tae's only move. Ball's in your court Leif, I'm probably going to end up sleeping through deadline.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 24, 2013 20:47:52 GMT -8
Yeah, that was my thought as well. Both the sleeping and the moves.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 24, 2013 20:58:48 GMT -8
The truly bothersome part of the quoted part is where she says her suspicions would have been raised by the person who placed the hammer vote onto Aethera had Aethera been lynched and innocent. So the person stating "Look we should lynch and we need to agree to a consensus between these voted people amongst us currently not voting to get a lynch so vote", then voting without reason to stir momentum (this I'm fine with) and then switching to be a third (of four needed) votes on another "twitchy" player and saying she probably won't be around for the last 5.5 hours of the Day bothers me a lot. How would someone going "Yes Taelac, you are right we should lynch I will vote Aethera to get the lynch through" be suspicious to Taelac when she set up the possibility for that hammervote for a lynch she wanted? Re-reading, this is interesting. It kinda puts anyone who might have hammered there in a no win situation. Almost a ready made excuse, assuming the rogue isn't lynched day 1. You know, I don't feel great about it, but I can see where the suspicions are coming from. Looking back, Tae's post in response to AL, "Oh, I can't get FoI" seems a bit... forced maybe? Sort of saying, "Vote shenanigans don't work for me, so I don't do them" type thing to dismiss a mention of possible voting shenanigans. Hmm... Vote: Taelac
|
|
|
Post by SeastarX on May 24, 2013 23:04:48 GMT -8
Oh lordy. Got in last night, sat down on my bed and promptly fell asleep fully dressed. I now have 4 melted ice-cream cones. Do not move in with 12 other people; you will never get a decent night's sleep again. I'm less thrilled, looking over yesterday with Seastar's late stated intention to not vote. I know her common MO is to swoop in late with her votes, but I feel like if we'd known earlier we could work together and build a bit better. I feel it's all the more crucial in this game, with the small group and the 50% rule. I don't see it as a cause for suspicion, I just think if we can keep lines of communication open we can plan better and leave ourselves less open to last minute changes. Mostly because I hadn't decided earlier. I know I tend to vote late but it's also been rare lately that I've voted first Day as well. This game, I'd been considering the options given the slightly unusual nature of it. The various vote switches were what really made the decision. It was fairly clear from my earlier posts though that it was quite unlikely I'd vote for Marinated anyway and some of the late votes for Aethera made me uneasy either due to a lack of explanation (Tae) or what I perceived to be a flawed argument (Marinated). It also didn't help that I was feeling somewhat suspicious if Tae and thus reluctant to vote the same way. She has no real gain in banning Marinated, and people could suggest it was some convoluted retaliation over her early vote. I think she as I would fear you or Leif more as a rogue. Eh, not necessarily. Leif maybe because he's started keeping a closer watch the last few games but Marinated (and Aethera for that matter) have both played to end-game as a rogue with me so that would present a different 'fear' so to speak. Mind, I've been a rogue with everyone except you (and Tae but she's modded when I was) so from that perspective it's tricky all ways. Anyhow. I'm still tending towards innocent on Al. Sets is Sets pretty much but he's lower down my list than Leif and Tae. As for Tae's vote I get that, and it really wasn't intentional yesterday. That said, I'm not sure that attempting to coast on purpose as you're suggesting would be the best way to go about winning a game this size. At most, it's a null tell so far as I'm concerned that roughly equates to saying 'On Day 2 Leif has posted a list of who didn't vote Day 1; he's done that before as both innocent and rogue but I'm going to vote because he's done it as a rogue' or something similar. There are likely better examples. For now, vote: TaelacGoing to try and figure out why I can't shake off the niggles about Leif.
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on May 25, 2013 3:36:51 GMT -8
In general, it might not be so wise to extrapolate from non-actions by the moderator at a time (4am) when said moderator can reasonably be assumed to be asleep.
Regardless, as of now I am considering Aeth to have resigned. She was innocent. On to more violent actions!
Taelac: 4 (Setsusa, AhoyLindsay, Leif, SeastarX) SeastarX: 1 (Taelac)
Total: 5 No Votes: 0
So Taelac is lynched. She was innocent.
It is now Night. You may not vote; otherwise act as you see fit. I require a PM from a certain person before the start of Day 3 at 4:30pm PDT today (May 25th).
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 15:27:44 GMT -8
Good news everyone, I've narrowed my list of suspects down to only three individuals. Success is clearly imminent.
Tentatively it seems that if there's a ban tonight, and if it's me, Seastar is probably innocent. With Leif expressing willingness to vote her yesterday (worth noting that that might not carry over), and Setsusa highly adverse to voting Leif, it wouldn't be a good situation for her. If there's no ban or if someone else is banned, I can analyze that later, though initially I think Seastar as a rogue would be a little more likely to ban Setsusa because while both Leif and Sets seem more inclined to vote Seastar than to vote me, I have indicated more wariness of Leif than I have of Sets, and Seastar has already expressed suspicion of Leif. Of course, it's all WIFOM at this point.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 25, 2013 15:31:45 GMT -8
Agreed with ^.
|
|
Furare
Game Moderator
ROMS Encyclopaedia
Posts: 502
|
Post by Furare on May 25, 2013 15:34:18 GMT -8
The sun rises. Another day. A fresh start. Not for everyone, though. One person will never see this new day. Never have the chance to start again. Never do anything again. Furare looks down at the body of Seastar. A smile on her face. She didn't strike her down. Knows who did, though. She holds a card in her hand. Lets it fall on top of the body. A Joker.
"By tonight, for better or worse, they'll all know who did this."
[SeastarX is banned.]
There are 3 players remaining. You require 2 votes for one person to secure a lynch. Your next lynch deadline is 4:30pm PDT on May 27th.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 25, 2013 15:35:44 GMT -8
Well. Vote: Leif.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 16:34:33 GMT -8
^You know I want to, but on the other hand, you know I want to. Need to think. On an unrelated note, anyone see the Star Trek movie? How awesome was that?
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 25, 2013 20:05:33 GMT -8
Well the escalated quickly.
I can really understand where it comes from, but frankly, I think it's ill thought through. Were I a rogue, why would I ban Seastar? The smart move is to ban Sets and hope to coast through with a non-posting Seastar and hopefully some FoI. Hell, I know better that to rely on Sets for an endgame.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 20:32:28 GMT -8
So what are you saying? You sound like you're talking to Sets because he's the one who voted, but unless you think I'm more likely to ban Seastar, why would you be? No comment on Seastar's niggles on you? No comment on the fact that Seastar and I had FoI on each other and wouldn't be a great pair to be with in this situation?
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 20:39:06 GMT -8
^Don't mean to jump on you there, just trying to figure stuff out. I admit Setsusa could be a bold rogue, but the way you've mostly been letting other people convince you of things this game (taelac persuading you to unvote marinated, us persuading you to vote taelac...) feels like a clever strategy and now the ambiguousness of your post is sort of like you're waiting for one of us to persuade you to vote the other.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 25, 2013 21:02:23 GMT -8
Why would a rogue that isn't Leif let me live to a 2-1 against them, Leif?
It's the obvious conclusion, but what you're suggesting is that rogue AL has miscounted the players as a rogue, made two right-before-ban posts and is banking on me now to read this ban as you wanting me alive. If AL's done this as a rogue, massively massive kudos, great play.
Sure, I'll need to think about it throughout the day but that just seems way too high risk to keep me alive when I'm saying "Yeah I'm not voting Leif" in a 2-1 if you're not Leif, playing as a rogue.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 25, 2013 21:03:18 GMT -8
Not to mention "Hey Sets convince me to vote Taelac" last round and now "I know not to rely on Sets at endgame" when the whole game has been endgame as described by one of your early posts adds up extremely well, doesn't it?
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 21:28:07 GMT -8
Vote: Leif I feel that for rogue Leif last round was a tough situation because there really was no good ban-how could he ban Sets and play with me and Seastar, yet how could he let Sets live given the likelihood of what's happening now? A Seastar ban would have been as good as any. It's no wonder he wasn't thrilled about lynching Taelac. Setsusa, if you are the rogue you have hoodwinked me well. You wouldn't be the first to do so, but you have/would have done so with some serious style.
|
|
|
Post by AhoyLindsay on May 25, 2013 21:33:24 GMT -8
Also, I knew there was a reason spell check kept underlining 'ambiguousness' before... It's because I was looking for the actual legitimate English word, ambiguity. I promise I can write.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on May 26, 2013 6:04:17 GMT -8
Why would a rogue that isn't Leif let me live to a 2-1 against them, Leif? Hmm, yes. Excellent point. Which one of the three of us would have no interest in banning you? So what are you saying? You sound like you're talking to Sets because he's the one who voted, but unless you think I'm more likely to ban Seastar, why would you be? No comment on Seastar's niggles on you? No comment on the fact that Seastar and I had FoI on each other and wouldn't be a great pair to be with in this situation? Yeah. I was talking to Sets, but you both raise good points. You'd have no interest in banning Searstar. I started thinking about it last night some. I have a strong suspicion that anyone who had niggles or even suspicion about me might be banned. It didn't occur to me when I first saw it, but after working on it some, it strikes me that it was a pretty low risk play for Sets. Spend a day giving a player, in this case myself, a large and largely inexplicable FoI. I know you asked about it several times. I didn't quite follow, but I wasn't about to start asking about it. It makes the finger really easy to point come to the end game, especially if someone has any sort of niggles that can be exploited via ban. He struck me as a bit suspicious day one, but I didn't really follow up on it day 2, partly because of the FoI. I should have tried talking Tae around, given her willingness to vote there day 1, but with Sets changing his mind about laying low, I figured it was a problem for another day. More the fool I. Vote: Setsusa
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 26, 2013 8:21:47 GMT -8
Changing my mind and having a vast difference in energy / time to devote to ROMS is different, and I explained that for you before Leif.
Were you innocent I feel you'd be more bothered about me voting you after yesterDay and questioning the change. However, you seem much more interested in getting AL to vote with you. Possibly the difference on that is that AL was pondering voting me whereas I insta-voted you.
Similar to yesterDay, it's hard to judge if that's rogue Leif's only play or just Leif's only play.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on May 26, 2013 15:11:58 GMT -8
It bothers me a little that you're holding your vote back, AL. If you deadline vote there's no chance to talk about it, so if that is your intention, I just hope you get it right.
I will be around later tonight and on my phone at work before deadline.
|
|