The Village of Secrets [GAME OVER] Werewolves Win!

[jak111]

Well we seem to all agree a possible second killing faction against town, so that means if Jonty shoots, 3 could die tonight.

Then if we lynch also today, that's a 4th, so before we have any real info we could be going into Day 2 with only 11 people, possibly 3 mafia, 3 secondary killing faction, and 5 town left, not even counting any third parties that are not killing factions.

[spiesr]

Well we seem to all agree a possible second killing faction against town, so that means if Jonty shoots, 3 could die tonight.

Then if we lynch also today, that's a 4th, so before we have any real info we could be going into Day 2 with only 11 people, possibly 3 mafia, 3 secondary killing faction, and 5 town left, not even counting any third parties that are not killing factions.

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

[jak111]

Well we seem to all agree a possible second killing faction against town, so that means if Jonty shoots, 3 could die tonight.

Then if we lynch also today, that's a 4th, so before we have any real info we could be going into Day 2 with only 11 people, possibly 3 mafia, 3 secondary killing faction, and 5 town left, not even counting any third parties that are not killing factions.

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

Which theory do you wish to test? Also, if not, what parties do you think are involved?

[Roger Dodger]

So, I have a question. A town vigilante can make a mistake and kill someone who is not mafia? Vigilante are dangerous even though they are trying to do the right thing. I think the town should get rid of a VT not keep someone who is going to shooting up the town and misfire. I still feel strongly about a lynching even though it is the first day. Sorry.

[Anarkistsdream]

I do too, RD... I don't remember any games where a no lynch on day one helped town...

[Iron Butterfly]

Well we seem to all agree a possible second killing faction against town, so that means if Jonty shoots, 3 could die tonight.

Then if we lynch also today, that's a 4th, so before we have any real info we could be going into Day 2 with only 11 people, possibly 3 mafia, 3 secondary killing faction, and 5 town left, not even counting any third parties that are not killing factions.

There is no reason for a Vig to shoot night one. There is not enough info. Any vet worth their salt knows this.

[MudPuppy]

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

I disagree. I think our "stable" balance in Keenerville is between the townsfolk and an armed mafia faction. Now another group has moved in with hopes of taking control... I'm not sure how they plan to do that without the ability to kill. So, if jonty's claim is true, I believe we do have 3 killing factions at work. Even with just two, I expect we'll wake up on D2 with enough leads to follow without rolling the dice against house odds in hopes that we lynch a non-townie. If there are two non-town killing factions, there's also the hope they'll shoot each other.

Vote No Lynch

In the meantime, I would like to hear more specifics on player reads from the two claimants.

[superkeener]

Official Vote Count 1.5

Anarkistsdream (0):
HotShot53 (1): spiesr
Iron Butterfly (0):
jak111 (1): jonty125
Jmac1026 (0):
jonty125 (4): X-Stor-X, Whatsausage, Roger Dodger, Anarkistsdream
kgb007 (0):
Lootifer (0):
MudPuppy (0):
rishaed (0):
Roger Dodger (2): Iron Butterfly, Jmac1026
spiesr (0):
virus90 (0):
Whatsausage (0):
X-Stor-X (0):

No Lynch (3): rishaed, jak111, MudPuppy

Not Voting: virus90, kgb007, Lootifer, HotShot53

With 15 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch. If 8 votes are not reached by the deadline, then the first player with 6+ votes will be lynched.

Deadline for Day 1 is April 03, 2014.

[jonty125]

I will not be shooting N1. There are no limits to my role, I can shoot every night, or no nights at all.

unvote, vote Roger Dodger for not responsding to my question, middle of page 13.

[spiesr]

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

I disagree. I think our "stable" balance in Keenerville is between the townsfolk and an armed mafia faction. Now another group has moved in with hopes of taking control... I'm not sure how they plan to do that without the ability to kill. So, if jonty's claim is true, I believe we do have 3 killing factions at work.

My point was that if you believe there to be multiple non-town killers you should be seriously questioning Jonty's claim. As three kills, even if one is theoretically cautious, is simply too many for a game this size.

[rishaed]

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

I disagree. I think our "stable" balance in Keenerville is between the townsfolk and an armed mafia faction. Now another group has moved in with hopes of taking control... I'm not sure how they plan to do that without the ability to kill. So, if jonty's claim is true, I believe we do have 3 killing factions at work.

My point was that if you believe there to be multiple non-town killers you should be seriously questioning Jonty's claim. As three kills, even if one is theoretically cautious, is simply too many for a game this size.

I had the same thought, but I would sometimes put in a vig, that when used correctly can be used to keep balance. A good vig is sometimes better than lynching, no discussion/hesitation, just plain kills.

[Lootifer]

Struggling to wade through the 5 pages without skimming.

Right now I find myself sheeping Spiesr.

[jonty125]

I had the same thought, but I would sometimes put in a vig, that when used correctly can be used to keep balance. A good vig is sometimes better than lynching, no discussion/hesitation, just plain kills.

Optimal word in that sentence been sometimes.

[StorrZerg]

People under the radar and i find scummy.......

Virus90, has defended, yet has not actually pushed for any lynch.

spiesr, besides some early pushing (joking mostly imo) he has done policy talk and arguments. Has not been giving reads on other players.

kgb007, either get active or get replaced. and the comment "the novels of posts since Monday made it unappealing to keep up on my phone" sorry some of us are trying to figure out the game............... Let's just keep making excuses to not post since that's helpful. Any little input is better than that response.

gonna do a revaluation on the 2 claims as well.

[kgb007]

People under the radar and i find scummy.......

Virus90, has defended, yet has not actually pushed for any lynch.

spiesr, besides some early pushing (joking mostly imo) he has done policy talk and arguments. Has not been giving reads on other players.

kgb007, either get active or get replaced. and the comment "the novels of posts since Monday made it unappealing to keep up on my phone" sorry some of us are trying to figure out the game............... Let's just keep making excuses to not post since that's helpful. Any little input is better than that response.

gonna do a revaluation on the 2 claims as well.

relax xstor, i was on vacation sunday to friday, flew back late friday night and active in another mafia, all from my phone, you can understand (i hope) if i don't want to read through D1 posts with a full complement of players posting especially when i don't have anything important to say only to have to re-read in a sober state to remember once i return home anyway

personally i don't care for nark's play style, too emotional for me. i think some know nark to play this way and troll him for these types of responses. i've never been big on forums before bc it can devolve into these types of arguments.

i can't remember who said of nark's premature claim that "it was probably going that way" with the voting behavior, we cannot assume this and i didn't like the unsolicited claim although the role and nark's meta fit his behavior

as for the group of people doubting jonty's vig claim bc of this supposed multi non town killing factions, i have 2 questions:

1) unless you know something town doesn't, why would you default to believing multi non-town killing factions based on the opening scene? obviously some of us didn't interpret it that way, so isn't there a chance the game will have the usual 1 scum faction?

2) would jonty still claim town vig if it's being widely considered that there are multi non town killing factions knowing that the vig claim may not relieve some of the pressure on him?

we'll know a lot more beginning on D2 based on the kill(s). jonty has already stated he won't be killing and i believe him. his role claim is worth revisiting assuming there was a second kill tonight

vote no lynch were we really going to find scum to lynch on D1 short of getting lucky?

[StorrZerg]

I'll be continuing with jonty since my case on him...

Whatsausage asks a potentially defensive question (in favor of jonty being town in my eyes)
Yet it seems my reasoning won over, So we have the Next vote onto Jonty from Whatsausage (i don't see anything unusual about this vote)

Next we have the lovely Roger Dodger pushing onto jonty.
Agrees with my reasoning, doesn't really add anything new or her own unique opinion on the matter. (null read)

MudPuppy complements me on my observation... (decides to not vote yet...)

The first response of Jonty that we have defending himself is here. My comments in blue

I explain that I would of easily taken it off if it was not for Anark's reaction, and my crummy case turned out into a good lead for a Day 1 with no info.

Well we can't prove that, and I've seen this happen before, and making a poor case, deliberately, to gauge reaction, I can see how it benefits town, but also, it could be a cover-up, and, then we could end up with the saga, jak makes poor case, Nark/or anyone votes jak for the poor case, jak responds it was to test the waters, and see who bandwagoned. Personally, I am of the opinion say what you mean, and mean what you say, and the case was poor so I'm sticking to my guns, not that I'm going to last much longer here.


So now on, to the wagon on myself, first member IB, a jokevote I believe. And to quote Roger Dodger "nuff said".
Next, the case on X-Stor-X, the long and the short of it, this is against my meta, and to be honest, it is, and it isn't. I'll only say things when I've got an opinion and usually on D1/D2, I don't there isn't enough evidence, but this time there was, and I've been through all that. The other votes are agreeing/trusting in X-Stor-X. APART FROM, Whatsausage, who says I'm scummy for making two cases simultaneously, so if we use that logic X-Stor-X is scum PERIOD. (reference to the BB game).
Remember his wording and how he defended himself for latter...

The case against me is indefensible, I accept it as a case, and would claim at L-2.
This (bold part of his quote) is bothered me the first time i read it. Hell my reaction if someone had used a "meta argument" against me would be to correct the issue. He states that it ISN'T against his meta. Why not post a simple link to a game where you mimic this behavior? Then we have his willingness to claim. I also find this odd. Lets say he is mafia, the safest roles to claim would be VT or ViG. Hell i know when i play in video mafia, it feels great to roll vig and claim on day 1. (granted set up is quite different 1 you know how many scum, 2 you know how many night kills will come) In a blind set up like this, I've seen no hints from his claim before this. Only just his WILLINGNESS right now. atm since i know his claim, this makes him look a little more townie.

Jmac is unwilling to lynch based on a meta read
Jak votes jonty. (different angle on the jonty, can't say i agree but its better than no original content)
IB attacks RD (seems resonable)
Lootifer makes a long case on Jonty, coming up Null leaning town
Anark votes jonty (calls my case bad, has his own reasoning for the jonty vote, seems resonable)

JOnty defends again. Comments in blue

Only thing that stands out here is the sarcasm bit. Something is odd here. Jonty can you please explain the sentance starting with And the jokevote... up until the [/sarcasm]?

I was just giving a quick play-by-play guide to the jokevote stage, it was to help set the context for my argument.

Jonty!!! I found it odd that you claim indefensible, but wait to claim, as if allowing your scum buddies to jump on the wagon to help prove their innocence and give credence to your lie...

Vote Jonty

OK, I don't understand this. The majority of the votes on me, are for me playing against my meta, and by my own admission, this probably is (I am in the process of trying to change my meta). If I was to come out and say, no, you guys are wrong, this is my normal game, it would not take long for that lie to be picked apart. The accusations are true, whether they make me scum, that's another matter. But we're only going to end up with a WIFOM argument.

I think its wrong to say the "majority of votes" When half the votes against you are for different reasons than my original case. I also find the comment "trying to change my meta" contradicting the original defense of "this is and isn't against my meta"

I fail to see how he has any case against me, I have said myself my first case was not strong, it was the first REAL case of the day (no matter how crumby).

See this is my issue, jak, the case was poor, and I don't think can be justified, by saying it was the first REAL case of the day, if it was the first REAL case of the day, then it would have substance.

(let's face it, everyone knows my first case was nothing, just throwing knives hoping to hit a target in which undeniably I succeeded in).

see this gives me the impression, you almost don't care who we have claim, just to get a claim, now that would be scummy.
I can agree with this statement on jak in this context. How ever, you don't seem to be sure about your comment. As if its a "hey back off or ill try to get you lynched" The way jonty presents his comment i find questionable

Which leads me to the belief that we may have outed a group Day 1 (whether they be mafia, 3rd party, 4th party, cult, whatever).

there is no link between me and Nark, to my knowledge.

Also note that jonty did hit his claim target at L-2 and failed to claim on time. (it is pointed out, and he does claim)


And i've come to the end of the posts of jonty.

In conclusion, Jonty's only work to finding scum or giving reads really delt with his initial post which i found different... a meta read.
Since then he really hasn't been contributing to progress of town. I see direct contradictions in his comments. I see his play style change drastically when put on the defensive. (More so to his old style, of limited posts with limited input) If one truly wanted to embrace a different change in play style they would not be worried as they appear (if town). I find mafia trying to cover their change in habits more willing to revert to comments that are said about them. And i see that happening with jonty.

This is @jonty, in addition to what ever you do to defend yourself, i would be interested in someone you would like to push for. Someone you find scummy. Maybe someone who bandwagon on you? Maybe a quiet person? Maybe the loud person. Either way i'm interested in your opinion on the matter. Something original.

The latter part is directed at people who believe both claims at face value.
So i ask the question to People who "believe his claim"
If you believe his claim, wouldn't you be interested in who he thinks are town? Who he thinks the scum are?
Going further, to both "people who have claimed" if they agreed on someone as scummy, wouldn't that be worth talking about? I think its quite silly to end the day on a no lynch.

[StorrZerg]

Comments in blue..

People under the radar and i find scummy.......

Virus90, has defended, yet has not actually pushed for any lynch.

spiesr, besides some early pushing (joking mostly imo) he has done policy talk and arguments. Has not been giving reads on other players.

kgb007, either get active or get replaced. and the comment "the novels of posts since Monday made it unappealing to keep up on my phone" sorry some of us are trying to figure out the game............... Let's just keep making excuses to not post since that's helpful. Any little input is better than that response.

gonna do a revaluation on the 2 claims as well.

relax xstor, i was on vacation sunday to friday, flew back late friday night and active in another mafia, all from my phone, you can understand (i hope) if i don't want to read through D1 posts with a full complement of players posting especially when i don't have anything important to say only to have to re-read in a sober state to remember once i return home anyway
It was the way you chose to explain yourself that was fishy. Specially now, a simple "i'll be back on friday to contribute" would have been enough. The wanting to put forward a reason for the excuse i found scummy.

personally i don't care for nark's play style, too emotional for me. i think some know nark to play this way and troll him for these types of responses. i've never been big on forums before bc it can devolve into these types of arguments.


i can't remember who said of nark's premature claim that "it was probably going that way" with the voting behavior, we cannot assume this and i didn't like the unsolicited claim although the role and nark's meta fit his behavior

how interesting would it be if he failed to do this behavior? and he flipped mafia? if ones meta is to act like this all the time... personally i find it a cop out to day 1. Allows him to draw attention to himself do something stupid and claim off 2 votes. Wave his junk around like he just don't care. I'd much prefer he skip those steps and just focus on reads, and defending himself like any normal player...

as for the group of people doubting jonty's vig claim bc of this supposed multi non town killing factions, i have 2 questions:

1) unless you know something town doesn't, why would you default to believing multi non-town killing factions based on the opening scene? obviously some of us didn't interpret it that way, so isn't there a chance the game will have the usual 1 scum faction?
Sure, from a closed set up "anything" is possible, and once flips happen we know who was really "guessing" and who might have been "too close to right"
2) would jonty still claim town vig if it's being widely considered that there are multi non town killing factions knowing that the vig claim may not relieve some of the pressure on him?
having to read this question several times... I don't think he thought that hard about his claim tbh. If he is town he isn't thinking that hard, he is just being honest. If he is mafia, he is trying to keep heat off himself. So that specific question doesn't apply imo. There is also the addition that he could be 3rd party.
we'll know a lot more beginning on D2 based on the kill(s). jonty has already stated he won't be killing and i believe him. his role claim is worth revisiting assuming there was a second kill tonight
If he says he won't be killing, if he is town easy to do. If he is mafia, then that is also easy to fake... That could be the ploy to lead the town roles to stay on him this night... and find nothing...


vote no lynch were we really going to find scum to lynch on D1 short of getting lucky?

Do you believe in magic? Based on how the lynch goes for day 1, (if mafia flips) then we have several people that look super town for how hard they pushed on scum. If the lynch flips town. Then we have information and get to see who was really pushing for right reasons, who had shit reasons etc. If we no lynch and lets say 1 random dies or 3 random dies. you are depending at that point on a role claim from another town to lead day 2. I say that play is overly risky with lack of reward. A lynch forces discussion it forces opinions. This is good for town.

[Anarkistsdream]

X-stor.... I am blown away, because I agree with your comments about no lynches and lynches... Personally, I can not recall ONE time where town won after no lynching... I think it is a horrible idea. However, my conflict is who, then, to lynch.

[HotShot53]

The latter part is directed at people who believe both claims at face value.
So i ask the question to People who "believe his claim"
If you believe his claim, wouldn't you be interested in who he thinks are town? Who he thinks the scum are?
Going further, to both "people who have claimed" if they agreed on someone as scummy, wouldn't that be worth talking about? I think its quite silly to end the day on a no lynch.

I believe nark's claim, and find jonty's claim to be plausible, I'll believe it for now unless something significant comes up to oppose it. So yes, I would like to hear their opinions about who they might find scummy now, if anyone, since I don't really have any leads myself. My default with no leads is to just go for someone who has been very inactive, to force them to start becoming more active or be replaced.

[virus90]

That's a good observation on Jonty, X-stor-X. He wrote more in his 1 post (not counting the correction) here than he did in all of the Emotions game (short game). I think your case has merit... that said, I was certainly encouraging him to participate more in the Emotions game and I liked his first post in this game. I'm not sure I want to jump on a bandwagon started by a joke vote and followed by a meta scum read based on a single post. While I definitely agree with the difference in style witnessed here, I am hesitant to "reward" his decision to jump into the mix with pressure. For now, I'd rather note the change and encourage him to keep participating. I'm not ready to vote just yet... going to try to review a bit more in depth, hopefully tonight, and see if anything else pops out.

in green indicated where he agrees, and then in orange the doubt... so what is it ? YES or NO ? i note this down as scummy behaviour

Never actually came back on that

I haven't come to any solid conclusions yet.... it's D1 and all. I am mostly townish on Anark and while I think his claim was a tad premature, there was a fairly high probability it was headed that direction anyway. My take is that Jak set out to push some buttons and Anark seems to enjoy a good fight and was happy to respond with one. I prefer not to resort to cutting him open tonight to see if he bleeds vanilla. I believe we have two factions of non-town folk in our midst and, with only 5 votes needed to hang, it likely takes only a couple of suspicious/curious townies to end up with a mislynch.

he is mostly town on anark but only voiced that AFTER the claim. i keep doing the agree / doubt colouring throughout my post.

There is no way that there are two non-town groups with a killing power and Jonty as a Vig. Either he is lying and is actually one of those non-town killers, or there is only one.

I disagree. I think our "stable" balance in Keenerville is between the townsfolk and an armed mafia faction. Now another group has moved in with hopes of taking control... I'm not sure how they plan to do that without the ability to kill. So, if jonty's claim is true, I believe we do have 3 killing factions at work. Even with just two, I expect we'll wake up on D2 with enough leads to follow without rolling the dice against house odds in hopes that we lynch a non-townie. If there are two non-town killing factions, there's also the hope they'll shoot each other.

Vote No Lynch

In the meantime, I would like to hear more specifics on player reads from the two claimants.

his first vote, no lynch, i dont agree on the no lynch, and all of this together makes my scumradar go of. only problem is that he is a mafia noob, he openly said that aswell, i am not sure if im giving him a too hard time..

Other people i find suspicious: lootifier, definately not looking strong townish either in my opinion. hotshot for voting on every wagon and basicly i disagree with each vote/reasoning (xstorx, anarkist, jonty, kgb)

but well, for now lets vote mudpuppy

[Lootifer]

I am not looking townish because I have posted with meaningful content, like, once. So thank you captain obvious.

Moving on I find X-Stor's argument incredibly convincing, especially this bit:

In conclusion, Jonty's only work to finding scum or giving reads really delt with his initial post which i found different... a meta read.
Since then he really hasn't been contributing to progress of town. I see direct contradictions in his comments. I see his play style change drastically when put on the defensive. (More so to his old style, of limited posts with limited input) If one truly wanted to embrace a different change in play style they would not be worried as they appear (if town). I find mafia trying to cover their change in habits more willing to revert to comments that are said about them. And i see that happening with jonty.

I would like to see Jonty lynched both because of the convincing cases by X-Stor and [implicitly] by Spiesr (since I believe the wording to mean multi faction scum), but also because there is a significant dichotomy between himself and X-Stor (unless X-Stor has big ole cahoonies the size of small planets, they are not buddies). One thing I would like ask (very politely, think of cute kitten eyes X-Stor) is where you think he has done the bit in bold. I must confess to skimming a bit recently and I am not realistically going to have time to pick over jontys posts. Do you have some examples that spring to mind?

Yes this is a turnaround. I stand by my earlier assessment that his single post was town; but single posts seldom give away scum, more often its associative tells and voting strategy.

vote Jonty

Yup 5th vote... DUN DUN DUNNNNN.

[virus90]

loot, you realise jonty already claimed ?

[Lootifer]

Yeah, does claiming mean they are immediately off limits for a lynch?

[MudPuppy]

in green indicated where he agrees, and then in orange the doubt... so what is it ? YES or NO ? i note this down as scummy behaviour

Never actually came back on that

Virus feels I'm noncommital on my read of Jonty. It is a YES that I feel jonty's post raises a big flag based on his play in the Emotions game and I think his is the best case we have. I did not vote for him because I'm not confident enough in the case to warrant risking a mislynch. Sorry, I didn't follow up that night... I did re-read but did not come up with a case on anyone I felt strong enough in... which is why I ultimately voted No Lynch.

he is mostly town on anark but only voiced that AFTER the claim. i keep doing the agree / doubt colouring throughout my post.

I stand by my statements. It's D1 and I don't have a very strong confidence level in any of my reads. The arguments Nark has been involved in feel more townish to me while I suspect non-town folk are sitting by and munching on their popcorn while enjoying the show.

his first vote, no lynch, i dont agree on the no lynch, and all of this together makes my scumradar go of. only problem is that he is a mafia noob, he openly said that aswell, i am not sure if im giving him a too hard time

You're giving me too hard of a time . Seriously, though, I didn't mind using the noob card in my first game but I really don't like using it here. The problem with that is I am still a noob... but trying my best to learn quickly. Despite having heard many pro D1 lynch opinions and reading mafia strategy articles which support that, I'm still a numbers guy and don't like the high odds of a mislynch. Even with a couple of strong pro-town reads, the odds of hanging the wrong guy are pretty high. I'm sure you recall how the D1 mislynch in Emotions was a huge factor in the quick ending to that game. Luckily, I was mafia in that game... but the "learning experience" has helped reinforce my gut feeling that a No Lynch D1 is not a bad thing. As I continue to gain experience, that opinion may change... but for now that is how I feel.

[Roger Dodger]

A claim means they are stating what role they are playing right? He's saying he's a vigilante. I am not sure this is a positive role. I think it is a danger to the town.