Hey guys. Posting at the family thanksgiving on my dads iPad. Pretty, pretty cool toy.

Lol BJ. Wolves confirmed given up as early as 3 days ago. Tchaz being the last wolf would wrap that up nicely.

Some things don't add up tho.

If there's only one wolf left, what's his role? If its the RB, why did they never kill ash until last night? If its a godfather, who rb'ed ash d2? I have some guesses but they're all heavily wrapped in tinfoil.

If/when Tchaz flips as the last wolf, we'll be down to neutral hunting. That's harder to do as neutrals can wolf hunt and act like villas. The only thing I can offer in my defense is that I think I'm a pretty good neutral and I think my stats back that up (lol sample size but still), and these neutral kills until today have been really damn bad.

Using any non-******ed win condition, he should have been killing cleared villas and lock wolves and yet he's been capping people seemingly at random.

I think if we win if we lunch from the post count bottom up we hit a wolf and bottom down we hit the neutral. If there are 2 or more neutrals, we are in trouble.

I think you may be 2/3 right here. If Vyk outed the wolf vig as a neutral is otherworldly good but i don't know that he tries to be the villa capt. as a sk. That just draws too much heat much of the time.

If he's the sk he's played a very good game.

villa, not a wolforneutral more when i get yto decent internetin ?3? hours

More than half of my posts in this thread have been phone posts and while I certainly have my share of spelling errors, I like to think they're readable.

Your phone posts are barely English lol. Take your time we have almost two days.

Here. Wince. Yes, apologies. I thought that was going to work, but it just didn't. anyway ...

I'm going to make a bunch of posts on various things I've been trying to think about. Then I'll be around for this famous interaction thing if you haven't all binged yourselves comatose. You're going to have to give me ~30mins??? to finish writing stuff.

Let's talk this through.

If it wasn't clear already, now that Ashington is dead, we know he was telling us the truth that he was roleblocked on his n2 Hold'em 07 peek.

So the question is who roleblocked him? xxsooted was the village roleblocker, and it would be completely asinine for him to roleblock the village seer after captain binkles flipped the exact role Ashington claimed. Therefore, there must still be a wolf roleblocker alive.

Why did the wolves not kill Ashington until last night? On Saturday (d3) he won the monikrazy vig and claimed to have won an angel instead to divert the wolf nightkill elsewhere. Although we can't trust anything Silman is claiming, it's very possible that the wolves had indeed peeked zdye724 as vig. If they did, killing zdye724 is a superior choice to Ashington, and the fake angel was unnecessary. If they didn't, Ashington's fake claim really did not work out, as it resulted in deaths to both monikrazy and zdye724!

So we need to figure out why Ashington wasn't killed n4 or n5. In my notes, I have that he asked to be angeled n4, which is possible as possible as Boo Radley was still alive. Looks like that scared the wolves off of him and onto loosekanen instead.

The Bryant Reeves kill is most puzzling, and it ended up costing them Silman. hardcoreUFO said it could've been because the wolves thought Ashington's reads weren't that great. He sure proved them wrong, peeking wolves twice before they learned their lesson.

A wolf godfather would be the only reason not to roleblock him n4/n5. There's only a ~random chance Ashington actually picks the godfather, and by then we've already agreed to give minimal clearance should his next peek be a villager. Even more puzzling is that there is no reason to roleblock anyone but Ashington!

Maybe the simplest answer is best: the wolves only have one nightkill, and Ashington was not killed because he was not targeted. He was not roleblocked because they wanted him to peek the godfather. Overall, looks like a couple of big mistakes on their part.

We're up against a wolf roleblocker, possibly even a godfather as well.

30 minutes? lol. Posts incoming & then I'll get to acc & early voters

I can follow what you're saying Acc.

Very odd choices for kills all around this game.

Who's who:

I have some tinfoil theories on who is who. I couldn't decide whether the correct strategy was to post them or keep them until later. But (i) I see other people in the thread doing this kind of thing without everyone else shouting at them and (ii) if people are going to vote me I suppose it must be better to speak up.

Tinfoil who's who theory premises:

All villagers are currently playing (ie unretired, not-injury free obviously, since we've seen some crocked players) NBA players. All of the NBA players in the game are villagers. This fits with what we've seen so far - and we've seen players who make the haters hate, such as Kobe and LBJ. All of the wolves are 'suits': owners, league officials and the player's union guy.

Tinfoil who's who theory 1.

The wolves are very likely to have a godfather. One strand of the reasoning is that godfathers seem to be very standard mish-mash roles. (So much so that I think many of us surviving have more or less assumed that one will probably exist.) The other is that there is a character who fits the flavour of the game very well for this role: Michael Jordan. He was a player (so 'looks llike' a player - people associate him with being a player) but is now an owner.

I admit that since we don't have a seer any more (wp Ash, lolwolves) I'm not sure how this helps us, but there is a tiny chance that someone may win a peek in a subgame (if there are any more subgames) - or there's an even tinier chance that a neutral will give us a peek (aka someone 'remembers' they had a one-off peek, etc).

Tinfoil who's who theory 2.

There are neutrals and the character doling out the 'suicides' is everyone's favourite referee: Tim Donaghy. I think the view that there are neutrals is also probably fairly widely held at this stage especially since lolBoo really was our angel and not a lost-wolf.

Why? Well the neutrals would have to be involved with the nba and be neither players nor suits. That leaves coaches or referees. (Ok, there are other possibilities, eg announcers, but anyway ...) There are probably too many coaches for that to be a good fit flavour-wise but a smaller number of name referees, making referees more suitable for a small (possibly one-man) neutral team. It's probably Donaghy doling out the day-vigs because the deaths are *fixed* to look like suicides.

Tinfoil who's who theory 3.

dar0 is a villager. More precisely, he's Metta World Peace. Suspended for the remainder of a season and returning the next NBA year over the Pacers-Pistons brawl for going into the stands and engaging with an opposing fan.

I really struggled to think of what dar0 was. For a long time I thought that the mechanism when he 'engaged' Euro was mysterious and consequently I was very suspicious. But I think this Metta World Peace idea makes sense - or at least better sense than anything else I can come up with.

Obviously dar0 can't confirm or deny this idea. I did toy with the idea of asking him, eg, if he liked his new name, or whatever, but that looks like an angle and I don't want to risk a modkill. So it's not clear how or that we can verify it. But something that other people may thiink worth thinking about.

Richard Tanner - please talk more about neutrals. No, really, please do.

Both RT and vyk quickly denied that they are neutrals or serial killers, each on the ground that they would have done it a whole lot better. However their reasons for this are a not completely perfect imo.

vyk said he would have lynched gad and Kruze instead of killing them and strung hardcore along instead of killing him. I suspect that he could have strung hardcore along. However he wouldn't have been able to kill Kruze until today because we had outed wolves every day since Kruze got day-vigged (including that day). And he'd have to have had gad lynched over Effen - which I don't think would have been easy, and I don't think that even vyk really believes would have been as esy as his casual dismissal makes it seem - or (later) over an outed wolf.

RT says that the day-vig has been "capping people seemingly at random". But that's really not quite true. On d2 and d3 he vigged the most villa player available: Forsy - widely held to be the most villa player in the game at the time (ok he flipped wolf, but the vigger may not have know that & been thinking like most other people), and Montecore - peeked villager.

So question to RT: who would you have day-vigged instead of Gad, Kruze, Hardcore and BJL - assuming that you were trying to vig villas until today?

I suppose we all had and have differing opinions on who was and who wasn't 'clearly' villa at any given point in time, but Hardcore looks a pretty obvious bet even without a peek (which I'm imagining a neutral SK/small team would have - is that a good assumption?), Kruze had that pretty villa-y subgame, I thought that gad was increasingly becoming thought villa at the time of his death, and people itt this morning were making wolf cases on BJL before his getting got.


One more neutraling question: what powers would be 'normal' for a SK besides a vig?


(irrelevant fn. I think we'll only find out later if the day-vigger had no d1 vig or it was blocked or w/e. But he may have chosen to forego it - and to concentrate on villagers - in order to allow for something like CT's lost-wolf theory to float to the surface.)

Numbers/wagonomics

If we are less than 5 villas then we're unlikely to win.The other options are 5-2-1 and 6-1-1 meaning either 11 wolves + 1 neutral, 10 wolves + 2 neutrals or 10 wolves + 1 neutral at the start of the game out of 40 players.

Game designers: is 11/40 non-villa too few?

d4 wagons of remaining players

Effen: CT, DW, Vagos, Vyk, 3 dead villa, 1 dead wolf
Kruze: accobra, 3 dead villa, 1 dead wolf
TN: RT, tchaz
Loosek: Dar0
Hold'Em: 1 dead villa
no vote: 2 dead wolves

I still think it strange that the wolves didn't try to steal the lynch here - kruze was being voted by 3 villas we know about and it wouldn't be hard for wolves to have done what BR did and hardcore tried to do - snipe to Kruze.

I did ask BR and hardcore to explain those votes, which would have helped understand the process but they never did. In particular I would like to know whether they were responding to TN's last minute snipe onto Effen. Was that giving up on saving Effen? Or was it a gambit to get villas suspicious of TN to switch to Kruze in reaction (her having sniped from a wolf to a villa the previous night)? She posted after sniping - indeed hers is the last post before night - so she could have re-sniped if she'd wanted to and had had a wolf colleague with whom she could co-ordinate to do the same. A key problem is that we don't know which wolves were in wolf-chat at EOD and which not.

Of the relevant people: Vagos and CT are itt up to night, Dwetz last posts at 10mins before night and vyk isn't there. (BJL last posts at 21 mins before night. Dar0 at 5 mins to night, RT at 1 min to night, silman not there). We know that there is at least one and maybe 2 wolves in the live players. Effen and Ashington were phone-posting - from the post title tell (and they told both us so itt), but there's no evidence I can see that anyohe else is. Is it possible to tell who is phone posting from the posts in some way other than the non-appearance of the thread title?

Given that I'm a villager, and assuming my Daro=MWP theory, the remaining wolves are either in { RT, accobra } or are in { CT, DW , Vagos, Vyk } and also not in good contact with TN that night. (If there is more than one wolf left there could be one in each category. Of course we have no way of knowing that she was in their chat I suppose, but it would have been silly not to, I think.

Given that CT, DW and Vagos are all in the thread and there really are good reasons to think that vyk is non-wolf (even though he himself keeps reminding us of that) if we were to judge on this ground alone I think we would lean towards the remaining wolves being in { RT, accobra } . But it's less conclusive than we'ld really like.

quote=RT]If there's only one wolf left, what's his role? If its the RB, why did they never kill ash until last night? If its a godfather, who rb'ed ash d2? I have some guesses but they're all heavily wrapped in tinfoil. [/quote]

Ok, I'll bite. What are your guesses?

re the subgame yesterday:

Arguably he did say something of substance inasmuch as he made several posts about how he wanted to vote for Tanner (until he self-preservation voted Dwetz and left). And of course he and Loosek tunnelled RT for most of the game.


tinfoil: If vyk is a neutral, Boo villa-angel and DWet vanillager then he should vote the angel. If vyk is a neutral, Boo villa-angel and DWet one of only 2 wolves surviving at that point he should vote Boo again because otherwise he runs out of wolves - BJL would be a very likely lynch today, and then we start neutal hunting in earnest.

Further random player notes/things that may be worth looking at (some won't be)

(This isn't supposed to indicate I'm only thinking about these four for non-villas, just some questions I had jotted down and didn't fit above.)

CT: Meta: does he always concentrate heavily on mechanical cases as opposed to magical reads? (I could research this myself, but anyone with opinions feel free.) The failed snipe at night+1m on d2 still is curious. Created the Kruze wagon d4 at night-45m and imo semi-hid some information that made his case less strong (although people who were reading start of day d4 more carefully than me may have been aware of the extra info), but didn't ever vote for him.

darO: looking back what do you think of your case on Loose (other than results orientated)?

VAgos: One might say we could ask Vagos the same question about his Boo/HoldEm case. That seems somewhat different to me, but ok .. also Vagos makes good points as a wolf

DWetz: what was your opinion of hardcore's case on you (apart from it's wrong!)? Did you have to think hard to choose Hold'Em to vig - and if so, and you think it's good/ok to tell us, who were you other candidates?

RT - interactions with Loosek (and +/- with Boo)

tinfoil: Q. Did Euro collude with his own being peeked or vigged combining irl busy motivation with deep cover for either vyk or darO? A. Meh. On the plus side he didn't post on 2+2 from then until today (Thursday). On the minus side he now exclusively posts in ww games & the only game in between this and one starting today was a 13man-er. Conclusion: lol_le_eurolol.

Wow, chaz, you weren't kidding. Those are novels

Going to try and cut down on the clutter by just linking the posts I'm replying to because they're long as all ****.

The "Who's Who" post

Wolves could have MJ but that's an issue since he's not a current player. If they have owner MJ who peeks as player MJ, that's going to give him away pretty quickly imo.

I think the neutral(s) are either a ref or refs yeah. Can't really think of anyone else it would be off-hand. Doesn't really matter too much though.

Could see Dar0 being MWP but your date might be wrong. The engaging and then being suspended might be the Harden elbow but then why would his target get called for the F2 and not him? (of course, that same question exists for the Malace as well)

No idea really, again, not terribly relevant as he can't confirm*

*Dar0, I know you know this, but please do not even hint at this stuff. We CANNOT afford a modkill right now. Disregard if you're a wolf/neutral obv, feel free to out yourself

Hey all, checking in from my parent's house. Good news is they have a computer, bad news is it's a Mac and I've managed to twice delete a relatively long post. Third time's the charm?

Things I really hate from today today:

LOL Silman. Pro tip: Saying dumb misleading stuff as a wolf is fine and all, but it doesn't really help to lie about how many people you have when there's a 100% chance you are getting lynched.

Tons of mechanics talk. There's not a lot of use in speculating as to how many of what is left. We've pretty obviously got a neutral person or persons, and a wolf person or persons, left -- but unless there's a clear way to eliminate a specific team today (and there isn't), which would at least extend the game and allow us more lynches, there's no point in doing more than trying to lynch non-villagers until the mod tells us we get to stop.

Accobra's response to what he thought of me. I think a villager just says "I'm a villager, and there's no reason not to shoot me if he's not, so he must be a villager, barring extreme FPS". Burying the lead by discussion of how I handled the sub-thread is just bizarre. God help me but vyk is probably right. In my ideal world Accobra flips either a solo SK or the last wolf; I am pretty sure if that happens I am fully spewed "villager or best FPS planner of all time".

But vyk, I know you're in Captain Awesome mode, but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE explain your reads (and "sick toan" doesn't count). You're quite clear from being a wolf, but you are not at all clear from being a neutral (outing the wolf vig does nothing here, for reasons I'll explain if necessary). You are still under evaluation as much as the rest of us, and your reasoning is one of the things we can use to evaluate you (and is probably THE primary thing I will use to evaluate you). Keeping up the "village captain" persona is just going to lead to possibly unwarranted suspicion of you down the stretch here, especially if you live that long and especially if you prove to be right about accobra.

I am basically never lynching DarO or Vagos at this point. I'm probably not considering vyk until final 3 either. Other than that, take your best guesses.

Going to have to go point by point on this one I think:

Don't be an ass dude, if we're down to one wolf and one neutral (even if it's two wolves and a neutral), we need to find both. No sense in ignoring one or the other.

This is wrong. I don't think I've ever denied there was a neutral. I've talked about situations in which there may not be one, but have never said we shouldn't consider it or denied it outright.

Can't really tell you without looking back over it (It's been like 6 real life days since some of those kills lol).

I will say, as we've neared endgame, I've had a really hard time understanding the SK's kills.

I would think they'd want to be taking out our clearest villas so that we are more likely to mislynch people (helps them win LDO). They've taken out people like Hardcore and BJL which doesn't add up to me. Hardcore was villa on most lists but Ash was nearly lock clear by virtue of being a seer. Even if you don't care about the seer (Neutral probably peeks villa) you'd want to get rid of a 99% clear person. BJ was at least a decent chance to be the lynch today, why you'd kill him I have zero idea. Let him live and be mislynched imo.

When I was the SK: 1 NK, 1 Peek, 50% chance NAs fail to hit me
I've also seen: 1 DK, 1 Peek, 2 lives, Can give another player a vig each day, Can't be killed until f11, etc. etc. (obv not all those were on the same character).

In short, it's pretty random but you can be pretty sure it's at least the DK and a peek.

Decent discussion acc

Or a neutral role-blocker.

Is it possible (if they have an RBer) that they RBed Kruze on n4. He'd just polled 5 votes and people were talking about him being a jester (which would gain powers with sufficient votes).

By this time I'm pretty sure he was trying to peek the wolfiest players so we would have certain wolves if possible.

Assuming that the wolves have a RB:

When someone (sorry, I can't recall who right now) first suggested that they had left Ash unRBed in order to let him peek the godfather I initially thought that if that was what they had done that it was an error on their part. However, I'm starting to think rather better of it.

First of all, as you discussed above, they might have had other reasons for RBing someone else on n4, as well as thinking Ash may be angeled, so it might only be n5 that we are talking about.

They then probably had either 3 or 4 players (total). If they have a godfather then leaving Ash to peek might even be a good play. If he peeks a villager we are completely unsure whether that player is the godfather. So we probably waste a lot of energy shouting at each other about that. The confusion is good for the wolve and maybe they can engineer a mislynch. If he peeks the actual god-father same thing (and the wolves might not have discounted the value of cover for the gf in being peked sufficiently). If he peeks a neutral (assuming they exist) then that's good for the wolves. Obviously, if he peeks a wolf that's bad for them. So if they think he'll peek at random then they would estimate to have 9 or 10 chances in 12 he'll do something which good for them.

Of course, their problem was that he wasn't peeking randomly. But they only had the one TN peek from which to deduce that.

No really. (Again, assuming they exist) the wolves also have the neutral(s) to worry about. Although they can't block the vig they might think that the neutrals can also peek (or RB or angel) and they might try to stop the those types of action.

Well I agree that it makes more sense to keep Ash alive if they have a godfather. I suppose it makes some to let him peek if they don't have a gf - eg if they have 1 player remaining now - he might hit a neutral and if he peeks a villager we run round in circles for a bit. But probably its somewhat more likely they do have a gf than don't on this evidence.

(See my Michael Jordan suggestion above for possible gf flavour.)



Another question that is relevant here, given what you've discussed, is why did they kill him the next night if they left him alone to peek on n5? Did they change their minds? Even though they would have been getting better odds on n6 if Ash was random, maybe they realized that he would almost certainly peek BJL n6 if given the chance.


There is one minor other possibility about n5. It seems pretty unlikely to me, but whilst i'm downloading thoughts uncensored: I suppose it's just conceivable that Hardcore was right and they were happy to keep Ash alive 'for his terrible reads'. So they may have not nked him (and spk'ed BR whose work to trolling ratio was visible increasing), but tried to RB him - only the have the RB itself blocked by a neutral RB.


fn. Whilst a RB would be usual for the wolves (especially as we had one). we don't seem to have had any actions blocked (at least afaics) except Ash's n2 peek. So no wolf RB and a neutral RB who blocks Ash n2 is at least a formal possibility.

"show your work"

It's wrong, but I think I saw where he was coming from. He and I JUST got done wolfing in the Buffy game (as lost wolf masons, so we did actually know each other from the start there -- otherwise, using that as an example of anyone's wolf game is a pretty bad idea because nobody knew anyone from the start -- I proceeded through that game with virtually no heat at all), and he is aware that as a wolf my brain does operate on a pretty good level (in particular, regarding strategic aspects of the game). I think I even commented to him at one point that if he sees me driving the action early in the game that that's probably a wolf tell. I almost invariably suck on day 1 (no, really, more than most people suck), and I believe that he would have thought it was statistically improbable that I would actually pick up on something from a fairly strong player (binkles) correctly -- and that therefore it was all a setup). And frankly, that was a pretty good observation from him, though it doesn't hold true here. I believe that if you go back and look at the posts on day 1 where I called out Binkles for making a terrible "read" on someone and then shrinking away when called out (by tweedy, a villager) -- and if you look at the subsequent interactions where Forsythio defends him against me -- I'm pretty clearly spewed as a non-teammate of theirs.

Re: Holdem -- I actually sent in the accobra kill right after EOD because why not, couldn't sleep for a damn long time due in large part to my frustration at the game, and decided at about 1:00 AM that IDGAF and that Holdem was either a wolf or a villager that deserved to die, sent in the kill, and was sound asleep ten minutes later.

The "Wagonomics" post

I don't really see a ton here really.

I recall trying to get the TN wagon started a few times, as did someone else (Vagos I believe). I think I voted too late to change again but I thought we had a shot to get the TN wagon going there right at the end and I thought she was wolfiest (turns out it was a wash since both she and Effen were wolves, hooray for hitting the PR though).

That whole episode is odd though because all 3 players were legit wagons if I recall. Effen and TN had more or less given up and Kruze was Kruze.

Ok, I'll bite. What are your guesses?[/QUOTE]

I had a few.

-xxsooted may have targeted Ash not believing him.
--Horrible I know, but it's xxsooted, so who knows.

-Ash is lying and forgot to submit a peek 2 nights in a row
--No reason other than embarassment to lie, but I've seen CPHoya do that exact thing before.

-SK had an RB he could use
--Would have to be a one time thing. Doesn't make a ton of sense given other info.

Like I said, they're all ridiculously tinfoily. Just spitballing really.

Here for a bit, soooo many walls of text my eyes are going to bleed. Cliffnotes? It seems like TONS of non useful mechanics talk.