Wait.. oh here is the PM
Leigh wrote:Yes its me the alpha. And you can't tell anyone or else I will eat you. If you do tell people no one will believe someone named Mr Bubbles. You will die and like it.
Moderator: Zaxxon
Leigh wrote:Yes its me the alpha. And you can't tell anyone or else I will eat you. If you do tell people no one will believe someone named Mr Bubbles. You will die and like it.
Puh-leaze! If I'd sent you a death threat, it would have gone more along the lines of: Do as I say or I will suck you dry. And then I'm gonna wipe that smile off of your cold, dead face.Mr Bubbles wrote:I can't hide it anymore.. Leigh is the alpha.. She told me in tells
Wait.. oh here is the PMLeigh wrote:Yes its me the alpha. And you can't tell anyone or else I will eat you. If you do tell people no one will believe someone named Mr Bubbles. You will die and like it.
Credit for the Mason strategy goes to noxiousdog and Leigh. They worked out what I believe is the perfect way to play that hand under this ruleset.triggercut wrote:BTW, kudos to nd, Grund, Leigh, and whomever else evolved the brilliant strategy of keeping one mason quiet while the other becomes a clearinghouse for information. I'm sure that let 2 seers get in touch with 2 masons and put together some formidable coordination.
Im not sure how it worked, but if Mark had protected Noxious on night one then that would have given a huge advantage to the village. I couldn't take the chance and vote Noxious. My stratagy for picking Crux was it was so obvious that you couldnt' really assertain what that meant. It was the obvious choice and therefore not very telling.Grundbegriff wrote:You sure about that, Pecos?triggercut wrote:Therefore, should a mason come "out", like nd did, I think it behooves the alpha Vamp to immediately go to him and represent that he's a vampire.
In hindsight (and that strategy was solid enough that were I the alpha vamp, I'd have played it no different from the way Mr. B did) I think if Bubbles had contacted noxiousdog very early and fronted that he was the seer, I think he could've swayed the team to lynch Varity at least. I mean, the alpha can contact the masons and say "I'm a seer, and I dreamt [player x] is an innocent villager". Heck, to boost his cred, he can keep bringing innocent villagers into the fold of the trusted, since he pretty much knows who the innocents might be. It's a risky strategy, but I think it's a good play to at least sow some heavy doubt to throttle back the open coordination on the villager team that took place early in this game.Grundbegriff wrote:Credit for the Mason strategy goes to noxiousdog and Leigh. They worked out what I believe is the perfect way to play that hand under this ruleset.triggercut wrote:BTW, kudos to nd, Grund, Leigh, and whomever else evolved the brilliant strategy of keeping one mason quiet while the other becomes a clearinghouse for information. I'm sure that let 2 seers get in touch with 2 masons and put together some formidable coordination.
Heh, sorry, let "vampire" in this case equal "seer". I'm just awake again after an 11-beer day at the ballpark.Grundbegriff wrote:You sure about that, Pecos?triggercut wrote:Therefore, should a mason come "out", like nd did, I think it behooves the alpha Vamp to immediately go to him and represent that he's a vampire.
I knew the seers were hidden. They were the biggest threats. I figured that Mark would protect someone who they felt would be a target. To gain the advantage. I was sure Noxious was the Mason.. You were a villager.. Mark was the hunter. I was hoping to go after a seer.. and I hoped that would buy us a little more time.Grundbegriff wrote:What was your reason for not killing Mark?Mr Bubbles wrote:Im not sure how it worked, but if Mark had protected Noxious on night one then that would have given a huge advantage to the village. I couldn't take the chance and vote Noxious.
Leigh came up with the idea of leading you to believe she was a Seer. The idea was to see whether she'd end up dead that night (indicting you as a vampire).Chaosraven wrote:I'm cracking up because I refused to give up the name of who I thought was the seer to the people who already knew that they weren't...
Well Crux was to throw people off the trail a bit.. Next round was gonna be the best stab at a seer and Noxious.. well he started the bandwagon against Chris.. so he just had to die.Grundbegriff wrote:Ah. So your stab at Crux was an attempt to hit a Seer by going for someone with a low profile?Mr Bubbles wrote:I was hoping to after a seer.. and I hoped that would buy us a little more time.
And what was your reason for offing noxiousdog?
The one thing I'd do would be to enact the rule where the alpha picks one cohort the first night...and then he and his teammate pick a third on the third night.Grundbegriff wrote:A man of passion.
Say, triggercut-- based on your observations, how would you tweak the rules, and why?
Staking J. D. on day 2 without having him seered first was pretty amazing. Was that an educated guess or a shot in the dark?Grundbegriff wrote:For the record:
On night #1, setaside scanned me and Varity scanned Crux.
On night #2, setaside scanned pr0ner and Varity scanned Mr Bubbles.
Retract his vote against Mark? To draw the momentum away from Grenard, persisting in the vote against Mark and getting others to ride that trend was Mr Bubbles's best bet.triggercut wrote:best play would've been to retract his vote for Mark and try to come up with a way to swing the lynching away from CG. Dunno if that was possible--
Neither. That was actual deduction. I fully showed my hand.triggercut wrote:Staking J. D. on day 2 without having him seered first was pretty amazing. Was that an educated guess or a shot in the dark?
The plurality rule, not a majority, staked Grenard, though. Retracting his vote would've kept things going for quite a while.Grundbegriff wrote:Retract his vote against Mark? To draw the momentum away from Grenard, persisting in the vote against Mark and getting others to ride that trend was Mr Bubbles's best bet.triggercut wrote:best play would've been to retract his vote for Mark and try to come up with a way to swing the lynching away from CG. Dunno if that was possible--
When I contacted you, Mr Bubbles had been scanned and there were only four people left who had an uncertain status: you, Orinoco, msteelers, and Chaosraven.Kelric wrote:Why you felt you had to pressure me into following your votes Grund by claiming the Seer had seen me as a not a normal villager, I don't know. I was following your votes from the first.
I have to agree with Kelric here. I think that under this ruleset, the game is unwinnable for the vampires, as long as the villagers don't make huge mistakes.triggercut wrote:Kelric suggested a few pages back that such a strategy is unbeatable. I disagree, but I can't fault the vampires, because I wouldn't have thought of the countermeasure to that strategy until too late.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. This just gets the alpha killed during the first lynching, or what am I missing here? Edit:Nevermind.triggercut wrote:Therefore, should a mason come "out", like nd did, I think it behooves the alpha Vamp to immediately go to him and represent that he's a vampire.
I think the strategy of outing 2 masons at the start is just as strong as this one. The only disadvantage that I can see is that it disambiguates the identity one one more person (The vampires have 10 unknows instead of 11) but puts up a nice decoy for foolish vampires to go after. Most importantly, it makes the strategy easier to understand and trust for the other players.triggercut wrote:BTW, kudos to nd, Grund, Leigh, and whomever else evolved the brilliant strategy of keeping one mason quiet while the other becomes a clearinghouse for information. I'm sure that let 2 seers get in touch with 2 masons and put together some formidable coordination.
The alpha should have tried to pose as a seer; that was the counterstrategy that I was most afraid of. But as long a the masons had played correctly, it would have only taken the masons some time to figure out who is who.triggercut wrote:In hindsight (and that strategy was solid enough that were I the alpha vamp, I'd have played it no different from the way Mr. B did) I think if Bubbles had contacted noxiousdog very early and fronted that he was the seer, I think he could've swayed the team to lynch Varity at least. I mean, the alpha can contact the masons and say "I'm a seer, and I dreamt [player x] is an innocent villager".
I did suspect Grund, but he's too valuable to lynch so early. There is no advantage (other than bragging rights) to kill vamps in round 1 or 2.Varity wrote: Noxiousdog, what where your reasons for not lynching Grund on the first evening, when, in my mind, he had moved himself to the top of the suspect list? Why did you pick ChrisGrenard?
I can't quite follow your reasoning here. I would think that it is always desirable to kill vampires, if you wish to win the game with as little friendly casualties as possible. If we hadn't gotten lucky and killed vamps in every round, we would still be playing and taking losses.noxiousdog wrote:I did suspect Grund, but he's too valuable to lynch so early. There is no advantage (other than bragging rights) to kill vamps in round 1 or 2.Varity wrote: Noxiousdog, what where your reasons for not lynching Grund on the first evening, when, in my mind, he had moved himself to the top of the suspect list? Why did you pick ChrisGrenard?
Either a seer will validate his story, or they won't.