quote:

---

Originally posted by Montague:
If you still need one more, i'll play. If not, no biggie.

---

Not really a big deal.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Step 1: enter the 17 names into the tracker
Step 2: Data/Sort by Player Name
Step 3: copy, paste, post

Not really a big deal.

---

Ok... Im LOST!

~MM

__________________
[Help me PIMP my Slide!] [Join Us,or DIE!][Refs][Me] [Werewolf 3!]

Villagers, your votes are due Sunday Night!

~MM

__________________
[Help me PIMP my Slide!] [Join Us,or DIE!][Refs][Me] [Werewolf 3!]

Most R0 wolf kills give barely any hints out anyways, but I think this one is the most cryptic- and therefore gives the least information on its own. As such, I don't have any more thoughts to submit right now- there's just so little to go on.

Back to watching...

__________________
You know, I get it that people are just looking for a way to fill the holes. But they want the holes; they want to live in the holes; and they go nuts when someone else pours dirt in their holes. Climb out of your holes, people!
-Hugh Laurie, House

ThoughtsofLepers

__________________
Your Captain N of 2008

In the interest of keeping conversation from being stifled by the assumption that "he who posts in the first arbitrarily chosen number of posts must be guilty", I'm going to get the ball rolling.

EDIT: Hah! Two people posted while I was writing that!

MasterWolf--not a lot of games under his belt, and therefore no established rep, good or bad. What can we conclude from this kill?

GLE would doubtless caution against trying to conclude too much from the first kill, with which I would wholeheartedly agree. It's only a single datapoint.

Assuming the wolves realized there was no angelic activity R0N, and they could have wasted whoever they want, they may (as the mafia in Mafia-2) want a more interesting game than WW8 turned out to be. Or, in an effort to communicate as little as possible, they may have simply decided to roll a die and kill at random. Other than that I don't see that there are many conclusions we can draw yet.

What do other people think?

REMINDER: as noted at the beginning of WW8, I am going to modify my posting frequency and post less. Although a study of the numbers has revealed a correlation between my high posting level and increased numbers of posts by other players, I can't always devote so much time. My intention is to try to keep it to two posts a day, if I can. I may fail, but I'm going to try.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liq:
Currently Voting:

ThoughtsofLepers

---

There are 4 players who did not play in the previous game. 2 of them have played before and 2 I am not sure of.

We know that the talkative/good players were shredded in the previous game. So there is a change up here by the WW's in the first shred. I am thinkin that the 4 new players possibly contain 1 WW but the remaining 12 of us that played last game are very suspicious.

My point been the lead WW had to have played last round or is been coached by a player from the last round. To intiate such a change in playing style would or could be from someone who knew to change the game and its present state. Which means to me there is ww somewhere in the 12 of us. I know duh! right... But that cuts down a search.

So imo this ww kill has bit of info, but broad and vague. but its only the first round. I have no vote decided as of yet.

Thoughts?

quote:

---

Originally posted by XplicitR:
and why is that?

---

I don't find you more suspicious at the moment.

__________________
Your Captain N of 2008

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:

MasterWolf--not a lot of games under his belt, and therefore no established rep, good or bad. What can we conclude from this kill?

---

He survived the entirety of WW last game, so there's at least a little info on how he plays.

If last game is any indication, MasterWolf leans heavily on early round pile analyses, and not much else. His posts are infrequent.
... and that's more or less it. I don't think his death has much to do with any particular threat to the wolves from his behaviour, so this is essentially empty information that doesn't narrow down the field.

If this current dearth of information continues throughout the round, I will (as I stated I would in the aftergame of WW8) be voting for a silent player.

__________________
You know, I get it that people are just looking for a way to fill the holes. But they want the holes; they want to live in the holes; and they go nuts when someone else pours dirt in their holes. Climb out of your holes, people!
-Hugh Laurie, House

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liq:
I don't find you more suspicious at the moment.

---

That's always good...but what indication do you have that they are a wolf?

quote:

---

Originally posted by XplicitR:
That's always good...but what indication do you have that they are a wolf?

At the moment I have nothing else to go on. Does the angel get to participate in R0?

---

Probably will post once more tonite... so much for 2 a day!

Voting fwyb

Thanks,
Jazaray

__________________
A Plastered Dragon Original Limerick:
There was a nice lassie named Jaz
Many wished to have what she has,
A delicate face,
A soft warm embrace,
And a whole lot of bedroom pizzazz.

WeedIan: Jazaray is like MOTL's Mom.

quote:

---

Originally posted by XplicitR:
what indication do you have that they are a wolf?

---

What indication do you have that he is not?

__________________
Your Captain N of 2008

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Day 1 Post 2:[QUOTE]Originally posted by XplicitR:
That's always good...but what indication do you have that they are a wolf?

At the moment I have nothing else to go on. Does the angel get to participate in R0?

---

[/QUOTE]

Okay thanks for the info, I thought maybe the kill was not an experienced player because the angel could have a chance of saving them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
GLE would doubtless caution against trying to conclude too much from the first kill, with which I would wholeheartedly agree. It's only a single datapoint.

---

He would, and he will. But, I do have something to note:

quote:

---

Originally posted by XRKon:
Interesting choice of kill at the very lest. With the trend being a very experienced player offed in the first wolf kill this seems more like an attempt to divert the normal terms of play then anything else. Why? From what I have seen the wolfs have been doing well in all other games, why change the strategy now. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

---

I think that it's just as likely that the facilitator of these kills may've watched the round of mafia that just ended as opposed to WW. In a direct contrast to how the last WW went, in that game the mafia took out all the moderate/low posters and let the high volume posters/heavyweight names live, and the result was the exact same, a clean sweep.

With that said though, a quick scan of the player list shows that the only player who played that game who is in this iteration is myself. It's worth mentioning that Liq GMed it, but the problem with trying to draw much of anything from it is that anyone could've watched.

Not much else to say yet, nobody's really caught my attention thus far.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BernieB:
As is the standing tradition, I am voting to lynch Bernek.

Of course, since he is not currently playing, I will then suspect the next player who posts after me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BernieB:
As is the standing tradition, I am voting to lynch Bernek.

Of course, since he is not currently playing, I will then suspect the next player who posts after me.

---

I'm for the Bernek lynching