How bout the fact that he wasn't holding a viola case?
-
Well, I can honestly say that I am not all that pleased to still be alive. I had rather hoped that when I died, and was proven to be innocent, the game might progress beyond the random voting, and bandwagoning for poor reasons. However, as I am still alive, I am going to offer my own analysis of the last round:
Basically, the day ended with four large voting blocs, a smaller bloc against nfreader (two votes), and several singleton votes. Obviously, the largest bloc was against me. Unfortunately, I don't think that we can read too much into that group of voters, as it was quite a bandwagon. Personally, I suspect everyone that voted for me, but not in any more than the mildest manner. I also suspect that at least one of those people is a wolf, blending in very successfully with a bandwagon against someone who made himself a target -- I have no guess as to who the wolf there is.
The next largest blocs were against SoItBegins, LNSU, and prophile. Mackilroy was among the bloc that voted for SoItBegins. Personally, if I were a wolf/terrorist/traitor/cop/whatever, I would kill off someone who voted in a bloc (as that makes it harder to trace motives), and who I might want to take out anyway. Now, the choice of taking out someone in the xander bloc, the SoItBegins bloc, or the prophile bloc is an interesting one. By taking out a member of the SoItBegins bloc, there might be motive to frame SoItBegins, or to hide a wolf in another bloc. Again, this is how I would behave, though, of course, I don't know how the wolves would behave. At any rate, working under that assumption, I am tentatively putting darth_vader and prophile on the 'innocent' list. I would also note that prophile is pretty much playing as he always does (i.e. random looking votes with little justification), which is another point in favor of his being innocent (most people play a little differently depending on their role).
So, this brings us to the prophile bloc. Smart wolves will not vote in a bloc this early on (i.e. all of the wolves will not vote together). Clearly, however, not all wolves play it smart (i.e. in the last round, the wolves were voting in blocs very early on). However, I am going to assume that we are up against smart wolves (I think that going after Mackilroy was a smart move, so I am assuming smart wolves). As such, we wouldn't expect all of the wolves to vote in the same bloc. However, one or two of them voting in a bloc makes sense. Thus, I am unwilling to move any of the votes against prophile into the 'likely innocent column.
This brings us to the LNSU bloc. I started that vote because I suspected LNSU of bandwagoning. However, he more or less convinced me that it was an error, and mrxak's vote tally made that believable. Thus, while I think my logic in voting against him was correct, I don't think that I didn't have all of the facts, and that those that voted against him based on that poor information combined with my logic were either not paying attention, or opportunistically voting for someone who looked a bit suspicious. Thus EKHawkman, Eugene Chin, and Templar98921 have all been shifted a bit to the naughty column.
The two votes for nfreader are understandable, though, I think, probably incorrect. They don't tell us much of anything.
Finally, Hypochondriac and Manta had a little thing going on, which doesn't really tell us anything (Manta voted Hypo at random, Hypo voted Manta in retaliation); I voted jrsh92 for the reasons I provided last round (which makes me look wolfy, unfortunately); and egroeg voted for kickme, probably at random, as his was one of the early votes -- again, this tells us very little.
So, my guess is that at least one of the people voting for me is a wolf, and that one of the people voting LNSU is a wolf. If we assume that only one person in each of those blocs is a wolf, then there is a better chance of randomly picking a wolf from the LNSU bloc. As such, I am going to pick one of the three more or less at random, and vote against EKHawkman , who was the last to vote against LNSU.
xander
-
Mackilroy: You're going d--
Oh, wait. I'm dead.
Dang.
-
@darwinian, on May 19 2008, 12:42 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
At any rate, working under that assumption, I am tentatively putting darth_vader and prophile on the 'innocent' list. I would also note that prophile is pretty much playing as he always does (i.e. random looking votes with little justification), which is another point in favor of his being innocent (most people play a little differently depending on their role).
This brings us to the LNSU bloc. I started that vote because I suspected LNSU of bandwagoning. However, he more or less convinced me that it was an error, and mrxak's vote tally made that believable. Thus, while I think my logic in voting against him was correct, I don't think that I didn't have all of the facts, and that those that voted against him based on that poor information combined with my logic were either not paying attention, or opportunistically voting for someone who looked a bit suspicious. Thus EKHawkman, Eugene Chin, and Templar98921 have all been shifted a bit to the naughty column.
xander
But if prophile is good, and I'm sure he is, then he will be able to play terrorist while keeping in the same style of play. It's possible. Never yet has darth_vader struck me as suspicious, in all the games I've played here. Sure he was innocent every time, but I suspect he is an incredible player.
I don't think LNSU is as innocent as he appears. However it would be a good place to hide a wolf. Eugene Chin voted for EKHawkman to start with, while EKHawkman voted for SoItBegins. SoItBegins was innocent, so EKHawkman looks more guilty, and Eugene Chin more innocent. But then EKHawkman changed his vote because of 'shifty voting patterns' after LNSU voted for SoItBegins. Eugene Chin changed his vote for no apparent reason. I agree with you that one of us is likely a wolf, and it's not me.
Therefore:
Spoiler
Eugene Chin
Thank you xander, that was once again enlightening.
This post has been edited by Templar98921 : 19 May 2008 - 03:44 AM
-
@templar98921, on May 19 2008, 01:36 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
<snip>
Therefore: Eugene Chin
Thank you xander, that was once again enlightening.
My reasoning for voting LNSU was that he'd let SIB talk him into placing a random vote, after he'd already placed his own vote.
While it's true that there's usually very little to go on in the first round, being led around like that just strikes me as unhelpful.
I'd tried to talk LNSU out of such behavior here, and later voted against him in a show of displeasure.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 19 May 2008 - 12:53 AM
-
@templar98921, on May 19 2008, 05:36 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
But if prophile is good, and I'm sure he is, then he will be able to play terrorist while keeping in the same style of play. It's possible. Never yet has darth_vader struck me as suspicious, in all the games I've played here. Sure he was innocent every time, but I suspect he is an incredible player.
I agree. That is why I don't entirely trust him (or anyone else, for that matter). However, his voting and behaviour are typical of his normal voting and behaviour, so I don't think that he has done anything to stand out. Basically, think of it this way: everyone starts in the neutral column. If they do things that make them look innocent, I mentally move them over to the "might be innocent" column. If they continue to appear innocent, they then move to the "maybe innocent" column, followed by several more grades of "probably innocent." The same can go in the other direction. prophile has just barely left neutral, as far as I am concerned. But he seems more innocent than most (at this point in the game).
Templar98921, on May 19 2008, 05:36 AM, said:
I don't think LNSU is as innocent as he appears. However it would be a good place to hide a wolf. Eugene Chin voted for EKHawkman to start with, while EKHawkman voted for SoItBegins. SoItBegins was innocent, so EKHawkman looks more guilty, and Eugene Chin more innocent. But then EKHawkman changed his vote because of 'shifty voting patterns' after LNSU voted for SoItBegins. Eugene Chin changed his vote for no apparent reason. I agree with you that one of us is likely a wolf, and it's not me.(/color)
Again, I am not at all sure about LNSU. I just don't think that he has done anything overwhelmingly bad, and I think that the bandwagon against him yesterday was a result of a simple mistake that anyone could make. Again, he is still mostly in the neutral column, as far as I am concerned.
xander
-
Okay. I'll withdraw that then.
-
I'd like to point out that we do not know for sure that darwinian is innocent. There's no way of knowing what the game mechanic could possibly be that saved him. However, there are two people on his bandwagon that I find suspicious:
RJC Ultra's only post this far was to bandwagon on darwinian.
@rjc-ultra, on May 17 2008, 01:40 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
We know jrsh92 for long enough now to know that his current behaviour isn't really suspicious. For now, I agree with Jacabyte, and vote darwinian.
Rickton also was on the bandwagon on darwinian, but jumped off near the end to a safer vote on a random lurker.
@rickton, on May 17 2008, 03:18 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
Saying that is a pretty dangerous thing to do, Mackilroy. Since you can't talk when you're dead you might get killed to keep your information out of the game.
Much as I hate SIB's random voting, I don't really think it's that dangerous. I do think
Spoiler
xander
is being extremely aggressive though, and aggressive to a tie vote. While lynching a random innocent is of course a bad thing, if we don't vote for anyone we don't even have the chance of lynching a terrorist. The first round is always sketchy because there's so little information, but if we don't shoot in the dark we have a 0% chance of hitting the target at all. And honestly our chances are even better in this game considering that there are four terrorists (and if the mayhem guy is also a killer, five killers).
@rickton, on May 17 2008, 10:53 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
Eh. I still think darwinian's suspicious but nfreader 's even more so, and the tie needs to be broken, even if I do think SIB is innocent. Oh well, maybe it'll teach him not to play Russian Nuke Roulette every round...
-
Your right, it's possible xander's still a terrorist. From previous games someone who comes back was always innocent. There is a first time for everything though
-
Well there are two options. Either he had the power to save and saved himself, which would make him innocent (I'm reasonably certain mrxak would not be the kind of host to give a terrorist more than one power), or someone else saved him because they thought he was innocent, which could possibly leave him guilty.
And Mispeld, part of the reason I changed my vote is because the round was tied between SIB and darwinian and I didn't want it to end in a tie. Of course, other people changed their votes after me so it wouldn't have been a tie anyway, but I wanted to make sure. The reason I voted for nfreader is because I hoped that putting pressure on him will convince him to play a little more intelligently but since this is nfreader we're talking about I'm not sure.
-
@mispeled, on May 19 2008, 01:03 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
RJC Ultra's only post this far was to bandwagon on darwinian.
Sorry about that, but he seemed guilty to me, bandwagon or not.
I now honestly believe he's innocent, though. Being a terrorist, why would he lie about that when he's dead and his terrorist role is about to be revealed?However, I've got no idea who to vote for now.
-
I am probably going to get in trouble for posting this, but I don't think it is fair for the players to act with incorrect information -- there is already enough misinformation being spread by the bad guys. First off, I was saved by another player (not myself). I won't tell you who that is -- sorry. This player saved me in order to "stir things up a bit." They don't know whether or not I am innocent (though I am, for all that I can convince anyone of that). So, I could be a terrorist.
Second off (and this is the bit that I am probably not supposed to share) it was implied that I will only be alive for a certain number of rounds. There was no guarantee about that, but if I die during an inactive phase, it is just as likely that my time simply ran out as it is that a terrorist got me.
xander
-
@darwinian, on May 19 2008, 05:32 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War Game 24:
Second off (and this is the bit that I am probably not supposed to share) it was implied that I will only be alive for a certain number of rounds. There was no guarantee about that, but if I die during an inactive phase, it is just as likely that my time simply ran out as it is that a terrorist got me.
You mean as some sort of special role?
-
Well, most offended by Darwinian's accusations of my votes being random, I've compiled a spreadsheet (:o) with the amount I trust people, based on their posts, on the scale of -1 being evil to 1 being good, Mackilroy/SIB both being 1 of course. The lowest individual on that scale (but at only -0.03 so I'm not going to set this in stone) is LNSU.
Convince me otherwise.
