|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 6, 2007 16:27:33 GMT -5
One thing that I've noticed is that IF zuma turns out to be pirate, it's highly unlikely that capybara is too. His defense, including openly advising to capybara to keep it down, is just too risky a pirate move so early in the came (again, if both are pirates). To some extent this undermines some of the reasoning for voting for him (IMO), but we are not going to play the "of these two, one must be a pirate, right?" game with that. Something else — Kyrie Eleison was defending zuma yesterday - and drawing suspicion for it. zuma-pirate could have more easily pushed him into a lynch (IMO) than night kill (not that the pirates necessarily did in Kyrie). Zuma's question this morning did strike me as a little odd (since he failed to forward any theory of his own). I do feel it important to re-emphasize, since it is easy to forget, we are also playing against as many as three pirate-aligned players who do not know who the pirates are. In this situation, I can absolutely, positively see a "one is a pirate, one is not a pirate" situation STILL mean both are scum. Let us not forget that!!!!
|
|
|
Post by diggitcamara on Jun 6, 2007 17:00:21 GMT -5
I do feel it important to re-emphasize, since it is easy to forget, we are also playing against as many as three pirate-aligned players who do not know who the pirates are. In this situation, I can absolutely, positively see a "one is a pirate, one is not a pirate" situation STILL mean both are scum. Let us not forget that!!!! ... and, wouldn't it be cool if the game actually started with just one pirate?
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Jun 6, 2007 18:12:36 GMT -5
I do feel it important to re-emphasize, since it is easy to forget, we are also playing against as many as three pirate-aligned players who do not know who the pirates are. In this situation, I can absolutely, positively see a "one is a pirate, one is not a pirate" situation STILL mean both are scum. Let us not forget that!!!! I'll repeat that myself. Sneaky Sam, if he/she's lucky, has the potential to do us a lot of damage by outing roles (if lynched). We need to kill him quick or hope for a lucky night kill (I'm tending to use 'he' for all of these since the role names are male (then again, it could be Samantha)). The longer Sam survives, the more 'pirate-like' he becomes since he might end up knowing more key information than the pirates do (and can alter his votes). Deadeye Dick is simply going to kill some of us and then become a pirate, without much we can do about it. Probability favors him not killing a pirate by 'accident'. Ben Gunn might kill some of us and then become crew. Our best case is to get Flint and turn him to crew. Ben doesn't get any privileged information; so he won't help the pirates all that much in the voting. The killing thing is a bit more worrisome (relative to the other non-Pirate scum roles).
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Jun 6, 2007 19:20:26 GMT -5
Okay, I'm finally caught up. After re-reading the entire day, I'm no longer as suspicious of Zuma as I was, instead, I've been paying a significant amount more attention to the tone of posts than so much the content. Namely, I think pirates are less likely to be aggressive and more likely to be subtly attempting to direct traffic when not in the spotlight. That said, panamajack seems to be posting a lot of "general analysis, very much how I would play if I were a pirate. I also find his Monday Morning "I wish I had voted for HockeyMonkey" odd. Thus, I'm going to go ahead and vote panamajack.
Another whose tone strikes me as odd on a similar level is Idle Thoughts. His posting style seems very different to me than it did in M3.
|
|
|
Post by autolycus on Jun 6, 2007 20:09:47 GMT -5
Yarrr, just chimin' in before I sail off for karaoke night. I luv me some blue lagoons! We got a few more page's o' bickerin', but I not be seein' anything to dissuade me from my previous vote. I figure the sharks will start gatherin' in the waters before sunset, and then we'll see some real action on 'tis ghost ship.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Jun 6, 2007 21:14:52 GMT -5
Well, we are going to be running out of time very soon. I didn't want to have to do this this soon, but I am Captain Steele.
I apologize for not spending enough time in this game, and creating so much suspicion.
In any event, there we are.
Night 1 I chose to watch ArizonaTeach because I found him the most suspicous.
Night 2 I chose to watch Pleonast because he seemed one of the least scummy and I thought the pirates would target someone who had not attracted much suspicion.
Neither were involved in any night kills.
As for who we should ultimately string up today, I need to re-read because as of right now I'm having a hard time identifying anyone.
I'll try to be back on later tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 21:27:19 GMT -5
Okay...wow. I'd just logged on to take a detailed look at storyteller/b] and Kyrie's posts---which is coming right up---and I see zuma's roleclaim.
zuma.
Dude.
Wasn't there any other way you could have made your defense? Seriously? I mean, I'm assuming that the claim is true (again, as with ArizonaTeach, it can be easily tested), and if it is, I really wish you hadn't done that.
Um.
More in a bit.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jun 6, 2007 21:40:40 GMT -5
Shit! Shit shit shit shit! I'm not sure what to believe now. This could very well be a false claim, and if it is, IMO, the real Captain Steele should sit tight for the moment, and not counter-claim. At least not yet. How do we test zuma's claim?
Oh, this is not good. Not good at all.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 21:47:04 GMT -5
I completely agree.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Jun 6, 2007 21:49:23 GMT -5
Damnit. I knew I had a bad feeling about the aggression against Zuma. I'm inclined to believe the claim, at least for now. The only way I can really see to test it is to wait it out and see if he watches anyone who finally is involved at night and go from there.
That said, we should NOT give him any guidance on whom to watch, because we're giving too much information to the pirates that can easily be manipulated.
|
|
|
Post by diggitcamara on Jun 6, 2007 21:50:14 GMT -5
(snip) I mean, I'm assuming that the claim is true (again, as with ArizonaTeach, it can be easily tested), and if it is, I really wish you hadn't done that. Um. More in a bit. (snip) How can it be tested? I only see: 1. Counterclaim (and then lynch one of the candidates) 2. Verification by death And yeah, this looks grimmer by the minute ... how much time is left anyhow?
|
|
|
Post by Lakai on Jun 6, 2007 22:11:07 GMT -5
Well, we are going to be running out of time very soon. I didn't want to have to do this this soon, but I am Captain Steele. I apologize for not spending enough time in this game, and creating so much suspicion. In any event, there we are. Night 1 I chose to watch ArizonaTeach because I found him the most suspicous. Night 2 I chose to watch Pleonast because he seemed one of the least scummy and I thought the pirates would target someone who had not attracted much suspicion. Neither were involved in any night kills. As for who we should ultimately string up today, I need to re-read because as of right now I'm having a hard time identifying anyone. I'll try to be back on later tonight. I don't understand the logic of Steele trying to watch pirates and not people who he thinks are going to be killed. The odds of watching a pirate preform a kill are small because they pick their killer at random. Steele could have watched a pirate and still not get any information on them. The best way to play Steele would be to watch people that are likely to get killed. The second night Steele could have picked between AZ and FCOD and could have had a good chance of getting it right. I think the pirates are fully aware of this and went for Storyteller. Steele should now watch either AZ and FCOD carefully. One of them is going to die soon. I don't believe Zuma's claim, but I don't want to risk killing him. The real Steele will either soon be killed or role claim himself. Meanwhile, we can go after other pirates. Unvote Zuma. I'll come back later with my vote.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 22:23:11 GMT -5
*sigh* All right. First things first.
I'm assuming for the purposes of the below analysis that zuma's roleclaim is accurate. (diggit, I'll offer my response to your very valid question in my next post.) As mentioned, I think that hockeymonkey is absolutely right that even if the roleclaim is false, the real Steele should sit tight (at least for now, and probably forever) and not counterclaim.
I also think Blaster is right that we shouldn't give zuma (if he is Steele) any guidance as to who to watch. Would it be fruitful, though, to strongly suggest that either the Doctor or Steele himself block kills on him until further notice? (I'm still thinking this through...maybe just the likelihood that one or the other will be blocking will be enough to deter the scum from attempting to nightkill him, although obviously neither the Doctor nor Steele should state who they're blocking.) The trouble with that is that is neutralizes the very power of Steele's that's so valuable...his witnessing ability. Dammit. Can anyone think of a way to maximize Steele's usefulness while keeping him alive for as long as humanly possible?
Next: This should be obvious (maybe more so to me because I've just gone over the rules and roles), but just in case---to the extent that there are any scum lurking on the vote-for-zuma bandwagon that developed so quickly toDay, I think those votes are likely to have been made in order to quickly kill another crewmember, rather than to target Steele in particular. That is, I don't think there's any way the scum could have known zuma was Steele unless (1) Steele and Flint "recognized each other" during an attempted night-kill, which apparently isn't the case, since zuma says he didn't observe anything, or (2) Sneaky Sam investigated zuma and managed to drop some hint or hints that the scum picked up on, which strikes me as statistically unlikely this early in the game. Still, it might be worth going back over posts that mention zuma---particularly in some off-hand capacity---to see if any of them could plausibly be construed as a signal to the scum about zuma's true role. Seems like a bit of a fool's errand, though.
Next post coming up.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 22:27:50 GMT -5
Lakai:
I asked this of someone else earlier in the thread, but why do you say this? It makes no sense. Why would AZ and FCOD be in special danger of being targeted? They're just masons, right? It's not like the scum can torture them into revealing the name of the doctor.
Hell, if anything, it seems like AZ and FCOD are among the safest of all of us, since presumably the scum are trying to find and kill the Doctor and Steele, and by putting AZ and FCOD to one side, their odds of succeeding in those goals are better than they otherwise would be.
I've been kind of loath to articulate that above paragraph to the extent I just did, but I think it's important (unless someone can provide me with a compelling contrary reason) that Steele not waste his time protecting/watching AZ or FCOD.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 22:38:14 GMT -5
DiggitCamara:
You're right; my mistake. I was thinking sloppily about the Steele role, and I assumed it was similar to the Officers in ways that it isn't.
Absent a counterclaim, I think Blaster's approach is the right one...keep zuma alive and wait until he strikes gold. Someone else can correct me if I'm way off base, zuma, but if you are Steele and you do witness someone doing something, don't worry about couching it in cryptic language or anything the next day: just go ahead and state expressly what you witnessed at the first available opportunity.
That's right, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 22:41:44 GMT -5
I forgot to add (damnable lack of edits!):
Lakai:
I think this is exactly right.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Jun 6, 2007 22:45:05 GMT -5
Yeah, I kind of blew it on night one, but my thinking was I honestly didn't know who they'd target, and my AZ suspicion got the best of me.
Night two I figured they'd leave the masons alone until later in the game.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Jun 6, 2007 22:51:43 GMT -5
That said, panamajack seems to be posting a lot of "general analysis, very much how I would play if I were a pirate. I have to say I think this is just a difference in playing style - I'm a generalist thinker by nature; I'm trying to play my strengths. I've already said I think pirates are more likely to cherry-pick specific points to use to confirm what they already know, so it appears what we consider pirate-like may be the opposite. I don't know exactly what your alternative 'non-pirate style' would be. I'm posting my opinions, along with what facts I've discovered. I do think people should put more weight on the second than the first. I suppose to up the quality of my posts I could only post facts, but I think that we all ought to be putting up our summary opinions (or at least reasons) for why we're voting or not voting for someone, so that the pirates are forced into mistakes (hopefully). I already explained that was mostly because it ended up outing our Officers. I think I have to back off on that because I'm being too self-centered. Looking at the way it went down, I don't know for sure if my vote would have tipped things one way or the other, since some people seemed determined to throw it into a tie. The other part of my regret (which I will hold to) is that I didn't want to sacrifice crew. What I've worked around to (partly out loud) is that we shouldn't be loath to lynch someone we think is crew IF we think it will yield more useful information about pirates and no other options present themselves. My thinking at this point is that if the same situation presents itself, I shouldn't worry so much about it. zuma as Steele - I'm not sure I believe it but it's too big a risk to lynch today. I wish he could have held off a little longer, but what's done is done. The semi-good thing is that whoever goes down today is almost certainly crew or scum.
|
|
|
Post by Mad The Swine on Jun 6, 2007 22:59:51 GMT -5
I agree with the suggestions that the real Steele stay silent assuming zuma's claim is false,reason being as soon as the real Steele is killed, zuma dies. Secondly,the doc and/or Steele should protect zuma assuming he is telling the truth since he is to valuable to lose. Thirdly, unvote zuma vote auntbeast
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 23:05:28 GMT -5
All right, I've got no clue who to vote for at the moment (especially in light of zuma's claim), but we do have a fair bit of data floating around out there, so I think I'm going to try and approach things a little bit differently. Back on Day Two, I compiled a post listing all the times fluid had mentioned any other player in a positive, negative, or neutral context. My theory (articulated in a prior post) was that, assuming the pirates didn't target fluid as a result of random.org, we'd be more likely to find pirates among those players who fluid mentioned positively, neutrally, or not at all, as opposed to those players she mentioned in a negative light. (If pressed, I'd look first in the pool of players not mentioned at all by fluid, then the players mentioned positively, then neutrally, and then negatively.) The tabulated results of that research are as follows. (There's a subjective component here, because I'm including general agreement with the points of a poster as a "positive" mention, while general disagreement with the points of a poster, if unaccompanied by clear suspicion directed at that poster, count as a "neutral" mention. I think that's the most appropriate approach.) fluiddruid's mentions:[/u] Positivestoryteller x 3 auntbeast x 1 Blaster Master x 1 cowgirl x 1 ( unvote) NAF1138 x 1 Neutralcapybara x 3 Idle Thoughts x 2 Mad The Swine x 2 Blaster Master x 1 cowgirl x 1 Negativecapybara x 3 ( vote) ArizonaTeach x 1 Autolycus x 1 cowgirl x 1 ( vote) Not MentionedCaerieD (now Hal Briston) ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (now tirial) DiggitCamara Flying Cow of Doom Gadarene Hockey Monkey Kyrie Eleison Lakai MHaye Panamajack Pleonast Zuma
I propose to do the same thing with Kyrie's posts and storyteller's posts, and see if any of the same players recur on any of the lists. At the very least, this should give us a decent idea of which players were flying under the radar, attracting the most suspicion, and benefiting the most by the support of the three crewmembers that have thus far been killed at night.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 23:07:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 6, 2007 23:14:55 GMT -5
....aaaaaaaaand that would explain a lot of the inconsistencies. (And also makes me feel better about my "I don't think he's a pirate - he's something else" theory! And at the same time not so good...ugh)
I have absolutely no problem with unvoting zuma right now. I think he made an awful, awful choice with who he checked out on Night One, obviously, and still hasn't given me sufficient explanations as to why he was so damn suspicious of me, but now I guess I can chalk it up to the fact we were both sharing roughly the same secret and Captains can sense it or some shit like that.
Dammit. I need to think here...what's the current vote tally?
Oh, wait, I wanted to explain why I was suspicious of Hal Briston. I'll do that in the next post.
|
|
|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 6, 2007 23:21:15 GMT -5
Granted, I had noticed AZ mentioning about being the Captain in toDay's thread, and certainly wondered where that came from, but figured if there was a role-claim I missed, it was just that -- an unverified role-claim, which would have left your statement still very suspicious. This seems to be a very, very odd statement because I hadn't mentioned I was Captain on this Day's thread at any point prior to this. Nobody had, for that matter. The word "captain" only comes up in a post about Captain Steele. So...he claims he noticed I said I was the Captain in a non-existant post from toDay, but also claims he didn't know I role claimed yesterday? OR, was the discussion in the Pirate Lair last night and THAT'S where he "heard" I was Captain? Follow me? vote Hal Briston.
|
|
|
Post by Lakai on Jun 6, 2007 23:30:33 GMT -5
Hal also seems to be playing it too safe. He tried to come in the game with a lame vote for Hockey Monkey and quickly unvoted when he was questioned.
The way he put out a vote that he could not defend rubs me the wrong way.
Vote Hal Briston
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Jun 6, 2007 23:37:42 GMT -5
My thoughts on keeping the power roles alive ( I will assume the scum are at least as smart, if not smarter than we are, and would be able to figure out our conclusions just as easily) :
The Officers (ArizonaTeach & FlyingCowofDoom) are in some danger from Deadeye Dick. They are obvious non-pirate targets.
Steele may choose to watch the Officers or protect himself, but as said, there's no need for us to tell him what to do.
If I read the rules right, the Doctor can't save against double-kills, right? Something else to keep in mind.
I can't say I did this specifically, but I searched on zuma to see where the assumption of him as a pirate led me. I didn't find anything in particular that struck me this way, but others are free to look it over again. He had a Day 1 liking for Pleonast (which supports his Day 2 Watch), Kyrie defended him on Day 2, and there's the stuff about capybara, but that started Day 1 as well.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Jun 6, 2007 23:46:14 GMT -5
You're right... FCOD and AZ might look like attractive targets.
I should probably put them on my list of potential people to watch instead of discounting them like on night 2. I think I'll come up with a list and just pick randomly.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 23:50:52 GMT -5
Kyrie Eleison's mentions:[/u] (citation is to thread and post, so I don't have to fiddle with the hyperlinks -- a listing of Kyrie's posts should be found here.) PositiveGadarene (1.77, 1.345) NAF1138 (1.77 unvote, 1.94) cowgirl (1.253 unvote) ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (1.295) storyteller0910 (1.403) Blaster Master (1.403) Autolycus (1.416 unvote) zuma (2.277) FlyingCowOfDoom (2.482) hockeymonkey (2.501) NeutralGadarene (WWPD.4, 1.48, 2.501) NAF1138 (WWPD.6, 1.390) Idle Thoughts (1.94, 1.120, 1.129, 2.312, 2.327, 2.332, 2.477) ArizonaTeach (1.128) Lakai (1.138, 1.141, 1.219) cowgirl (1.138, 1.141, 1.219) ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (1.279) Autolycus (1.305, 2.501) mhaye (1.387, 1.390) Blaster Master (2.133) Mad The Swine (2.277) storyteller0910 (2.283) zuma (2.327) NegativeNAF1138 (1.48 vote) cowgirl (1.77 vote) Autolycus (1.345 vote, 1.403) Lakai (1.416 vote) FlyingCowOfDoom (2.283 vote) zuma (2.312) mhaye (2.501 vote)
Tallying: PositiveGadarene x 2 NAF1138 x 2 ( unvote) Autolycus x 1 ( unvote) Blaster Master x 1 ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies x 1 cowgirl x 1 ( unvote) FlyingCowOfDoom x 1 hockeymonkey x 1 storyteller0910 x 1 zuma x 1 NeutralIdle Thoughts x 7 cowgirl x 3 Gadarene x 3 Lakai x 3 Autolycus x 2 mhaye x 2 NAF1138 x 2 ArizonaTeach x 1 Blaster Master x 1 ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies x 1 Mad The Swine x 1 storyteller0910 x 1 zuma x 1 NegativeAutolycus x 2 ( vote) cowgirl x 1 ( vote) FlyingCowOfDoom x 1 ( vote) Lakai x 1 ( vote) mhaye x 1 ( vote) NAF1138 x 1 ( vote) zuma x 1 Not MentionedAuntbeast CaerieD capybara (that's really surprising) DiggitCamara fluiddruid Hal Briston panamajack Pleonast tirial
Initial analysis and a foray into storyteller's posts tomorrow, hopefully a few hours before the Day ends. Right now I'm exhausted.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 6, 2007 23:52:20 GMT -5
zuma:
To Dick, but not to the pirates. I feel like it'd be more productive to watch/protect someone who's likely to be targeted by all the scum, not just one.
|
|
|
Post by ArizonaTeach on Jun 6, 2007 23:53:58 GMT -5
Gad, I like the cut of your jib...any thoughts on my Hal Briston controversy, or am I barking up the wrong tree again?
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Jun 7, 2007 0:05:28 GMT -5
I'm not sure; I'd like to take a closer look. That statement does seem odd, though. I also notice that neither Hal Briston nor his predecessor CaerieD were (as far as I can tell) mentioned at all by either fluiddruid or Kyrie. That's far from conclusive, but as I've said, it does strike me that pirates might be likely to choose targets early in the game for whom the pirates were hardly on their radar screen at all...so that when everybody goes back to analyze the posts of the deceased, the names of as many pirates as possible never cross their mind, whether positively or negatively. Certainly worth exploring. I'd like to hear more from Hal.
|
|