Apple WW

[Duck999]

I have no guarantee you're on my team. And you're good enough that even if you are, I don't want to risk it. And it's an even better bet in this game because there are three teams of relatively equal size, all of which are opposed, not counting the wolves.

You said that he is such a good player that it is not worth the chance he is on our side, and could help us win. That is a horrible reason. I'd keep him alive until we had more evidence because he is useful on our side.

[Fleeing Coward]

It's day 1, you painted a target on your back by going after me while specifically stating you're doing so for reasons not related to this game.
Then you do what you do every game - you tunnelvision on your target refusing to listen to any reason and insisting they're wolves because they're going after you. This is why you get lynched early so often.

I'm sure you're not the only one here that would rather get rid of me early than deal with me but most of them at least have the sense to not openly state it.

[Ramsus]

Duck, that ignores the part where what FC is known to be good at is manipulating his enemies into not killing him or killing other people when they really should just kill him like they thought in the first place. That doesn't actually make him a valuable member of the team. In fact as far as I can tell he usually isn't since he throws out lies and misdirection as a matter of course which causes problems even for people on his team. The only person who gets an advantage by FC's playstyle is FC, everyone else suffers more likely than not.

Also Aventine basically ignored what firedaemon was really saying in order to twist things to try and subtly change the meaning so that he could make an argument against it. As what I saw was firedaemon saying (correctly) that most likely any random person is statistically unlikely to be on your side on this game, and FC's talent for manipulating people into not killing him when they should means he has a talent that's a notable threat in an opponent and not much aid as a teammate and thus was a pretty decent choice of day 1 lynch. Then Aventine seems to have intentionally twisted that statement as if firedaemon was saying FC was more likely to be a wolf specifically and then argued against that. Which either mean Aventine was arguing against it just to argue and show he's being active already or he actually had a motive for it and was actually trying to protect FC. In the later case that'd make FC and Aventine wolves or masons. And masons generally don't go in for character attacks in my experience. Though... *shrug*

Edit: Got ninja'd by FC. Interesting how his post is all about making firedaemon's behavior look irrational while as far as I can tell it's probably the only actual rationally thought out vote so far. (Including mine, I'm not at all afraid to say I voted for FC for personal reasons.)

Edit 2: I suppose it would be unfair of me to leave out the possibility that Aventine twisted firedaemon's words for no particular purpose at all and it was just because that's what he does. Because that is in my experience Aventine's general playstyle.

[Ionbound]

You said that he is such a good player that it is not worth the chance he is on our side, and could help us win. That is a horrible reason. I'd keep him alive until we had more evidence because he is useful on our side.

As Ramus said, FC is quite honestly a risk not worth taking. And as I've said several times before, this would not normally apply but does here, due to the three opposed teams setup. As well, FC seems to have an aversion to making logical arguments, instead opting to attack me personally based on other games. Their hypocrisy, as well as seeming inability to make a logical point, is what's really driving me at this point.

It's day 1, you painted a target on your back by going after me while specifically stating you're doing so for reasons not related to this game.
Then you do what you do every game - you tunnelvision on your target refusing to listen to any reason and insisting they're wolves because they're going after you. This is why you get lynched early so often.

I'm sure you're not the only one here that would rather get rid of me early than deal with me but most of them at least have the sense to not openly state it.

Fine. FC, if you have a logical argument for someone that isn't based in "reasons not related to this game", go for it. I'm all ears, really. I just want to make a good day 1 lynch.

[Legato Endless]

Fine. FC, if you have a logical argument for someone that isn't based in "reasons not related to this game", go for it. I'm all ears, really. I just want to make a good day 1 lynch.

Here's one:

Your percentage is based off a fundamental misunderstanding of the game. Ignoring the Seer (who doesn't care about the color war) and the bad apples (who need to die regardless), and the neutrals (who might have been cut) lynching someone who could yet be any color isn't actually good for you 66% of the time. It's only good for you something vaguely around 33%. (since the wolves raise the desirable outcome probability, but the seer and the alligned masons lower it)

Here's why.

You don't have a kill power if you aren't the wolves.

What's your goal? It isn't to kill off every other color. (unless you're evil)

It's to kill off one of the other two colors.

So. Let's say Aventine scans me tonight. He finds out, surprise surprise, I'm a hostile color that needs to kill him. Now, what should Aventine do tomorrow?

Try to lynch me?

That would be a waste of time. Because I'm irrelevant to Aventine's goal.

Avetine needs to kill his target color. Any time one of my hypothetical teammates is killed, it's a kill that didn't further Aventine's win condition.

Now, there is an argument that should my color team take a runaway lead, it will make things difficult to control the lynch later, but with the complicating factor the wolves killing everyone, that kind of defensive strategy probably won't work well in the early going. Especially considering with the amount of scry interference we are going to be having, and the limited ability of the normal apple scry, networking is going to be dangerous.

[Duck999]

Rain Dragon is being non participatory day 1. He couldn't even make a random vote.

[Aventine]

Also Aventine basically ignored what firedaemon was really saying in order to twist things to try and subtly change the meaning so that he could make an argument against it. ... Then Aventine seems to have intentionally twisted that statement as if firedaemon was saying FC was more likely to be a wolf specifically and then argued against that.

No, that is not what I did. Let me try to state my logic as clearly as possible. It starts with firedaemon's logic, which as I understand it goes something like this:

1. The color win condition means there is some degree of competition among the good apples (in addition to good v. bad)
2. There is likely an even distribution of the three colors (for balance and fairness)
3. Ignoring possible neutrals/whatever that don't have color for simplicity, there is (by (2)) roughly 1/3 of each color
4. FC is a skilled player, and a serious threat to his enemies
5. By (3) FC has a roughly 66% chance of being the enemy
6. By (4) and (5) it is advantageous to kill FC as quickly as possible to prevent him from causing too much damage

Are we in agreement so far? Ok, so my response:

A: There is likely to be significantly more good apples than bad (because that is how these games work)
B: By (A) FC is statistically likely to be an ally in the good v. bad conflict (even if not in the color conflict)
C: The good v. bad conflict is the more important one. If we descend into full on color-war the bad apples are likely to win and we all lose
D: By (B) and (4) it is advantageous to keep FC alive
E: By (C) the advantage to keeping FC (D) takes precedence over the advantage in killing him (6), at least until the bad apples are dealt with (or we have evidence that he is one)


So I am not claiming that firedaemon said that FC is likely to be a wolf. I am claiming that firedaemon did not fully take into account how the good v. evil aspect of the game affects his logic. And I am further claiming that by fully taking good v. evil into account it can be seen that the opposite of firedaemon's conclusion is reached. Was that clear? Does anybody have any problems with my logic?

Edit 2: I suppose it would be unfair of me to leave out the possibility that Aventine twisted firedaemon's words for no particular purpose at all and it was just because that's what he does. Because that is in my experience Aventine's general playstyle.

Hooray for unnecessary attacks on someone else's character for no reason other than they disagree with you!

[Fleeing Coward]

Ramsus: You've made it abundantly clear that you're going to do everything in your power to screw me over even if the narrator tells you we're on the same side so you trying to twist things to make me look bad is no surprise.

Regarding me only been harmful to any team, I've been playing on this forum since 2007. Anyone who bothers to look can see exactly what I can do in games. Instead of trying to push your blatant lies on other people, I'd like to see you even find 3 or 4 games where I've actively harmed my team during that period of time.

Regarding Firedaemon providing any sort of logic, she got it completely wrong. 2 colours can win this game. At the end of the game X colour just needs to have more than Y colour to win but that does not stop Y colour from winning as long as they have more than Z colour. That means for each colour, the only ones they really want to eliminate is the colour they need to outnumber and the crab apple (and even then they don't have to go for complete elimination, just ensure they outnumber the other colour).

Also, easiest way to end the game and the only way multiple apple colours can win - destroy all evil apples since otherwise, the only way your colour can win is if you're the same colour as the colour of whatever bad apple remains and the crab apple is dead.

[Rain Dragon]

Rain Dragon is being non participatory day 1. He couldn't even make a random vote.

Well now it would be silly to make a random vote rather than vote for Duck999.
Yeah, descending into a colour war so soon will just encourage town in-fighting as many other people have said before.

[Fleeing Coward]

Rain Dragon to tie things up if my count is correct.

[Ramsus]

@FC: Not sure where I said you were only harmful to your team. I was pointing out that Duck's reason for us not killing you (your being a "good player") didn't make any sense since the thing you're good at is actually not helpful to anyone but you.

But seriously, even if nobody else finds this obvious, we both know you're going to find some way to dodge lynches through backstabbing and manipulate people in this game. It's way too full of potential for it. I honestly have no idea why anyone would even consider not lynching you day 1 since there's no way you won't wind up pitting people against each other to ensure your survival/victory even though it will be detrimental to themselves as they'll never really have the backup you'd lead them to believe.

{scrubbed}

@Aventine: I'm sorry if you feel that my including another possibility that was less likely to result in reasons for people to want to lynch you offended you. Or is it that you're taking exception to me remembering your previous behavior in other games? Either way, since I was analyzing the situation, it was in no way unnecessary to include that possibility once I'd noticed it. Your latest post was much better and I'm not arguing the logic of it, doesn't really change the way you went about your first response though.



I still however see no reason given by anyone why we should not lynch FC and lynch someone else instead. At worst he's an equally valid choice as anyone else as far as sides go. As far as enjoyability of the game he's the best choice as there's a fair chance it will be you (person reading this aside from FC because that wouldn't make any sense) he will manipulate and screw over. And while yes, anyone else could do the same, at least with them it was interesting and not just frustrating that you fell for FC being FC or worse that someone else fell for it and you wound up suffering for it too.

[Sprig]

Doesn't seem to be a reason to lynch duck... Nor Rain Dragon now he has spoken.

Now my only curiosity is FC's reaction to receiving two votes... Is that a 'I'm some sort of role and I have reacted even though I know better' or a 'I'm expendable so I'll object in case this gets out of hand.'

[AvatarVecna]

ThePhantom, you're under arrest for abusing the laws of probability at some indiscernable point in your past!

[Fleeing Coward]

Neither, I just don't like people voting for me because of perceived slights that are not related to this game.
If it were random or they simply didn't say anything, I'd have been totally fine with it since someone has to die so I'm just as valid a target as anyone else.
Deliberately voting for me because of non game-related reasons and openly stating it though - that I'm going to object to every single time.

{scrubbed}

[Ramsus]

{scrubbed}

[Sprig]

Anyone want to last minute jump on Fleeing Coward with me?

[Aventine]

@FC: you are oversimplifying the color war somewhat. Yeah X doesn't need Z to be weak in order to win, but Z needs X weak. Which means X benefits from Z weakening simply because it makes Z less able to attack X. So X wants Y to have less people than X, and wants Z to not be strong enough to do too much damage to X.

Now, the fact that things are more complicated than they might seem supports your side in the argument about killing you since if you are Y then X has motivation to keep you around in order to harm Z. It's not strictly everyone not your color is your enemy, there is room for subtlety and negotiation. But I would disagree that each color only wants to attack their target color.

Spoiler: Response to Ramsus

Show

@Aventine: I'm sorry if you feel that my including another possibility that was less likely to result in reasons for people to want to lynch you offended you. Or is it that you're taking exception to me remembering your previous behavior in other games? Either way, since I was analyzing the situation, it was in no way unnecessary to include that possibility once I'd noticed it.

You said it was possible I was twisting peoples words just because that is what I do. If you really do remember previous games then you would remember in Careless when I said I take accusations of that very seriously. The implied (and maybe not obvious enough) reason is because I strongly dislike people using strawman-ish word twisting arguments. Personally I find people who intentionally use them highly annoying. So now you are accusing me of doing something I find distasteful, and declaring that it is something I regularly do. That is why I was offended.

And here is the thing, I don't twist other peoples' words (unless I genuinely misunderstand them, which happens occasionally. But I certainly try hard to avoid such twisting and would welcome someone showing me where I did so. The problem is you have a tendency to just declare any argument you disagree with as twisting words). Look at firedaemon's response to what I originally said. (S)he accepted my argument as valid and gave the reasons why (s)he came to a different conclusion. Reasonable, logical response. I disagree with it, but it seems we understand each others' reasoning and can appreciate that there is some validity to them.

Then you come in and accuse me of twisting firedaemon's words. If I did that, then why did firedaemon accept my argument? I got the impression that (s)he felt I understood and accurately represented his/her argument, at least well enough to make a decent counterargument. Are you the only person capable of perceiving how I twist words, such that while firedaemon seems to accept that I accurately represented his/her argument only you can see that I didn't? I would think that at some point you might begin to wonder why only you can see what it is that I am truly doing.

Don't believe my insistence that I don't twist words? Reread what you said here:

Your latest post was much better and I'm not arguing the logic of it, doesn't really change the way you went about your first response though.

The latter post you reference chances nothing in my response to firedaemon, just explains and makes explicit a few things I expected firedaemon (and other people) to recognize and understand without me holding their hands. You accused me of twisting firedaemons words to make it look like (s)he argued that FC was statistically more likely to be a wolf than town. I did not do this, in any way, shape or form. Can you not see the weirdness in twisting my words and claiming I said something I never actually said, in order to support your argument that I twisted firedaemons words to claim (s)he said something that (s)he never actually did say? Really at this point I can't say anything more than "Physician, heal thyself."

Edit: wait what? Did Sprig just try to get people to switch to FC at the last minute on the logic that he responded to two poorly justified votes? I don't see panicked wolf there, I see FC responding to poorly justified votes. What is wolfy about that? Really, am I missing something?

[AvatarVecna]

Sphazre must die! They haven't so much as logged on since before the game started! Clearly, they are guilty!

[Internet Flea]

Day 1 has ended, narration to come.

- - - Updated - - -

So, what do we do now?
I think we... form a mob?
Has anybody done this kind of thing before?

The apples milled about uncertainly, when suddenly the gravelly voice of Dcuk999 broke the silence.

I'll tell you what we do now. We find one of those Bad Apples, we pick him up, and we throw him out of here. Then we do it again, and again, for as long as it takes.

How do you know that?
Have you done this before?
Will you do it again?

Are you kidding? What kind of apple knows the intimacies of mob rule off the top of his head?
A Bad Apple, that's who!
We should toss him out, just like he said!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
No! You don't understand...

The words were drowned out as the booming started. The apples surrounded Duck999, lifting him up on their shoulders and preparing to heave, when Duck999 was suddenly lifted up, amidst the booming voice of the Maw.

"How long has this apple been in here? Looks pretty old, and grainy." The apples watched as Duck was turned to and fro, then turned away as the Maw sank its teeth into him.

"Still good though," it spoke, and left.

Duck999 was taken by the Maw. He was a member of the Apple Corps, and a Red Apple.

Night 1 begins now and ends in roughly 24 hours.

[Ramsus]

Huh, seems like Duck should have spent less time defending other people and more defending himself.

@Aventine: At this point I'm just gonna let it drop as I foresee a circular discussion that results in nothing in our future if I really responded.

[Ionbound]

Aaaand we killed off a mason. Wonderful.

[Legato Endless]

Considering the nature of the argument, I'm going to assume for now that Fire Daemon and Fleeing Coward can't both be mafia. Fire Daemon looked quite sincere in her desire to kill FC, and bussing day 1 that fervently day 1 is odd. Much weirder still when you have two players known for early game lynches. Seems far too risky.

[Logic]

Note to all players: I can (and probably should) be included in any PMs to the narrator, Internet Flea.

This includes night actions if you are not using the Quicktopic threads.

[Internet Flea]

Boy, I sure hope tomorrow ends up going better.

I think it will.
Better for us, at least.
Not so much for you, though.
Then again, it's not like you'll be there anyway.

The green apple turned as the nearest apple pulled out a wicked-looking peeler. He tried to run, but just kind of fell down and rolled in an arc back toward his pursuers.

Why are you doing this?

Have to start somewhere.
Might as well be here.



In the morning, the apples gathered around the green skin of an apple, the only part of Count Dingdong they could find.

Count Dingdong was peeled by the Bad Apples. He was a Good Apple, and a Green Apple.

Day 2 starts now and ends in roughly 72 hours.

[Count Dingdong]

So. This is happening again. Perhaps I should take this as a compliment?

Good luck, town. Glad to be of whatever lack of help I could be.

[Ramsus]

*waves goodbye to Count Dingdong* ...though I'm sure I'll be joining you sooner rather than later.

Anyhow I guess I will vote for Fleeing Coward again as I still think he's our best choice unless anyone presents evidence otherwise.

[Fleeing Coward]

Ramsus. If you're not going to actually participate and just continue this senseless vendetta against me then you're useless to us.

[Aventine]

Ramsus

Even putting aside the fact that you are being actively and intentionally unhelpful to town, if you can't see why FC is a terrible choice to lynch right now I...I don't even know what to say.

[AvatarVecna]

Please ignore this post; it was delving into the possible identities of the other masons, and I don't feel like aiding the wolves in hunting them down. Have a nice day!

[Ramsus]

Ok, so that's a logical reason to not vote for someone. Now we just need a logical reason to vote for someone.

{scrubbed}

{scrubbed} I provided a clear argument yesterday for why I think you're a good person to lynch. Participating doesn't mean "does what FC would like people to do". It means contributing to the discussion. Which I clearly did. And same for Aventine, I'm not being intentionally unhelpful by trying to remove FC as an obvious future problem for guaranteed some members of town. Even if he is a mason he still has a color and will almost certainly wind up screwing over someone. Of course if he is a mason we should probably not lynch him. But otherwise I see no reason for us believing any other claim from him right now and if he isn't a mason he's still a better person to lynch than just about anyone else unless someone comes forward with some good reason to go for anyone else. Aside from "Ramsus didn't agree with me automatically because I am me". Because that kind of behavior is ridiculous. Seriously you two. I hope so badly neither of you are masons because if you are you basically just got yourselves killed just so you could argue with me.