Bugsy

Members
  • Content count

    875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Bugsy


  1. What the absolute storms happened here.

    Right, well, I’m going to look through posts again to see who tried to shape the lynches on constables away from Gaea. That said, one such person was obviously Alv. (Of course, it’s wholly possible the Elims saved him to frame him, but knowing what we now do about Gaea I concur with El’s analysis from last cycle - I’m willing to make this lynch)

    1

  2. Hello, all! I promised a readthrough of the thread last night, and I'm following through now. It's long, though, so be warned. I'm spoilering it to prevent thread bloat. 

    Spoiler

      

    Quote

    Why hello there. If I had to guess, Altea Meza poisoned the wine. Could be the corrupt constable, but if we killed her, well, there'd be no more items, right? I'm sure we'd surprise Joe if we Day 1'd the black market -Hael

    Honestly, this might be for the best. Elims can only kill with daggers, and I'm not entirely on board with keeping a system around that lets them get more.

    Quote

    He's the finest there is, I say, bold as brass - not a Soother, but has the skills of one if you leave him in a room with someone for long enough. The only decent candidate, I say. -Bard

    Feels like there's more to this than just an offhanded quip, but I might be reading into it too much.

    Quote

     I like my PMs, and I’m pretty sure all of us want to keep the black market around. -Striker

    I'm... not sure how that's become conventional wisdom already, especially considering it's the main way for corrupt Senators to get more kills, but you do you :P  

    Quote

    It's be a *very* long time since El and I played the same game, and it's been rare that we've had an opportunity to work together. I trust her to be a sensible Governor, and she'll do a better job than I. -Hael

    I rather agree with this assessment. Better someone reasonable be made governor than someone who's not - it would allow us to hold them accountable, since if they use it in an illogical / improper way, they're clearly deserving of suspicion 

    Quote

    The 5% is nominal. 1 out of 20 times this person dies, are they falsely revealed. Therefore, unless we have specific reason to think otherwise, we should assume the lynch results are correct.

    I think people with daggers should claim. That will give us an idea of how many are out there, and info on who can kill people. That will help narrow down any kills made tonight. -Fura

    Fura, this post alone is enough to make me immediately suspicious of you :P

    The first paragraph is sowing disinformation. If that was accidental, it would be neutral. If it's deliberate, it's a strong elim indicator. Taken together, that statement has quite an elim lean in my opinion. As for the second, people with daggers should most certainly not claim. The Corrupt Senators likely won't, so they'll just know who to target to get more weapons for their own use. 

    You're my first suspicion of the game.

    Quote

    So, like Bard said, we either need basically everyone to vote on whoever we want to lynch (very unlikely) or we need to keep as few people as possible voting on a person. Which means our lynch targets should only get two votes. -Striker

    Ehhh. Vote manipulation is a very real concern.    

    Quote

     

    This is true, and targeting the Constabulary with our first few lynches is probably a good idea; without the ability to correctly discern alignment, this game will become an absolute headache. However, I believe Constable General Altea (Gaea) to be evil, rather than Joe or Wilson. The idea here is that the hardest decisions require the strongest wills, and ultimately shutting down the black market, while being a hefty price to pay, is a price higher than losing free PMs or having a random Survivor role floating around
        
    As for Governor, I vote no leader. I’d prefer giving this to someone scanned with a ledger, and the Elims can’t hammer this vote if we don’t let them, so we might as well wait to hand it out. Also, I’d be less willing to trust those putting themselves up for it—at best, it’s a bid for glory, and at worst, they’re seeking control of the lynch in the later game. Three votes is a lot, and giving it to anybody D1 seems reckless and potentially deadly. -Fifth

     

    I agree with your first paragraph, not so much with your second. Although, I wonder, could we free a constable with the Survivor role? If we could, we could potentially kill all 3 without having any be corrupt. 

    Village lean on you.     

    Quote

     

    Lynching the constable general right away might not be a bad idea, as a way to keep elims from using that mechanic to return a player of theirs from the jail. -Elandera

     

    Ehh. If that happens, we just threaten the player with a lynch / kill unless they out their teammates. The Survivor is no longer village and just wants to live - by guaranteeing them protection if only they sell out their team, but promising to kill them otherwise, we create a liability for the elim team.    

    Quote

     

    I could go for this.  It gives us the best odds at finding the corrupt constable, removes the need to waste another lynch should we get it wrong the first time and, more importantly, allows the Gods of Luck and Chance to have the final say, which is always a good idea. :P -Alv

     

    Right, this is in character for Alv. Village lean :P

    Quote

    I feel like it would benefit the elims more if PM's were closed (which would prevent village cooperation, pooling of resources, etc), so I'm a bit reluctant to lynch Wilson. It could definitely be the case that Wilson is corrupt and the fact that lynching her closes PM's is meant to dissuade us from doing that. If there's any constable I would suggest lynching today, it would... probably be Joe? Lynching Gaea today would be a waste of her ability, since there's no one in jail right now. Although not being able to buy items would not be fun, I think it's a better alternative than losing PM's. -Lum

    Lum doesn't seem like the type to go all-in on something like this when she's an eliminator, which means in her ranking of who we should lynch (Joe > Gaea > Wilson), I rather doubt she'd put the corrupt constable at the bottom. Which reinforces my belief that it's Gaea. 

    Quote

    Fura. The eliminators almost definitely would not claim, and if they had any search warrants they could steal and use as many daggers as they had warrants for with impunity. Let’s definitely not. -El

    Much more concise than what I said, but very much agreed :P

    Quote

    I mean, that’s a bit of a contested subject. PMs are universally good for villagers if confirmed villagers are a possibility, but otherwise they’re arguably just as good for elims if said elims are good at manipulation -El

    There is potential for confirmed good villagers in this game, so PMs would likely be more beneficial than not. Still, I agree that they're not the hugely important thing many are making them out to be.

    Quote

    As the aide to Senator Onde, it is my opinion that Constable-General Yosef Busshu be brought in for questioning, as he was there at the time of the murder. -Rae

    Hmm. For most people, it would be out of character to coach a vote in RP with little to no explanation, but it's not excessively so in this case. Still, Elim lean. 

    Quote

    Joe lynch, to me, was suspicious as heck, and I’m in agreement with Drake that it was far too easy—however, I don’t clear Drake for pointing this out, as he could easily be corrupt and trying to come out on the right side of history. -Fifth

    I certainly don't clear him either, but I definitely have a village lean - there was enough activity after what he said that I think we can presume he as an Elim wouldn't have thought the Joe lynch was secure. Also, both Kidpen and Rae (plus Alv, but I think he's village) voted on Joe after that time; my gut tells me at least one of them is Elim, and if the Elims felt the need to strengthen the vote last minute it's doubtful one of their number would have weakened it by voting on Gaea.

    Quote

    Elim!Snip pulling off a mislynch like this would almost certainly result in getting himself lynched. -Striker

    I disagree. This is where the corrupt constable becomes super important for the Elims - the uncertainty of it means Snip could very well confuse or obfuscate and pull it off correctly.

    Quote

    Everyone is saying that it will also mean no more Daggers but that is not true at all.  I know of two ways to keep Daggers in the elims hands without the Market and that's just what I've worked out so far.  I'm not going to reveal them as this post alone will give them far more ideas than I wanted them to have as it is. -Alv
     

    I see similar strategies, but all rely on either items that are in limited supply or information reveals that the village can exploit. I quite strongly disagree with your conclusion as to the value of the black market. 

    Quote

    The elims would have to be very careful with their bribes if there's only a couple of votes.  It wouldn't take much to spot a pattern. -Alv

    It wouldn't take much to produce a pattern, either - between the statistical noise from villagers making bribes and the intentional attempts at misdirection, the Elims could fairly easily make such analysis useless given we have no way of seeing who made the bribes. 

    Quote

    As long as we are careful, we can spot the elims if they use bribes to save another.  If we have four votes on someone and they flip elim then we can be fairly sure it's true -Alv

    These two statements sort of show the errors in each other. If we keep our votes to 4, elims can save each other and even save villagers to drive mislynches. And what's to stop a villager from saving themselves?    

    Quote

     

    Alright now, Striker, please tell me why you decided to frame me. :(

    Was it because you regretted your posts and knew suspicion was going to come onto you? -Lum

     

    Alright, this seems super forced. I'm guessing this is distancing, in all honesty.    

    Quote

     

    Okay, so, I guess I may as well admit it. I scanned Lum D1 with my ledger. I decided to PM Devotary because I had no read on her, and I figured village!Devotary would keep the chain going and elim!Devotary would just kill me and say I was obviously framing Lum when I eventually claimed in thread if the chain never went anywhere. 

     

    ...huh. Looks like I was probably wrong? If Striker is who started the chain, I doubt he'd be on the same team as Lum. Bussing a teammate this early seems unlikely.     

    Quote

     

    We also had two separate vote manipulations last cycle, so forgive me if I err towards piling the votes rather than keeping them low. We don't get confirmations of alignments on living players, either. -Rae

     

    Heh, this is quite cleverly phrased :P
    (I'm still suspicious of you, though)     

    Quote

     

    Super insane theory: Striker and Lum are both evil, but Lum didn't have time for the game, so the elims bussed her. -Fura

     

    I mean, that could be. I honestly wouldn't be surprised

    TL;DR: Somewhat suspicious of Gaea, Rae, and Fura, conflicted about Striker, village lean on Alv, Drake, and Fifth.

    And lastly, a note about Snip and the dagger: there's every possibility that the Elims just gave it to him in the hopes of stealing it back next turn - using it on Burnt would tell them precisely where it was, so they could potentially use it again (after sowing suspicion of Snip and Ark as well)

    1

  3. Hey there, and welcome to the forums! The Shard is without a doubt a great place to get involved with the community, I’d recommend just paying around the forums and finding topics you’re interested in, or maybe creating a thread or two for your pet theories. Remember to read and follow the rules, and you’ll be fine - everyone here is very friendly :D 

    If you’re interested in the community side of things, I’d recommend checking out the Discord server, and also taking a look at Sanderson Elimination, which hosts frequent forum mafia games. We’re in the middle of signups for a game right now, and it’s actually a rerun of my first ever game a few years back, so now’s a perfect time to join if you have any interest!

    1 minute ago, I lost my flute said:

    Also I see under your name it says you are a kandra, is it possible to change that or is it a rank.

    That changes as people upvote content you post - the more good content you produce, the more your rank rises. Don’t be too concerned about that - it’s really only supposed to be positive reinforcement, so don’t let it bother you :)

    Also, it’s generally recommended to not make 2 consecutive posts on the same thread - if you have more to add, you can edit your post to reflect that instead and prevent clutter. It’s not a huge deal, just something to keep in mind ;) 

    2

  4. Senator Alendi stepped off the train with a newspaper folded underarm and an amused smile he struggled to wipe from his face.

    Corruption in the Elendel Senate? Frankly, it went without saying. The Senate of Elendel had never been an organization that gave much thought to the people of the city; its members were selected to represent the Noble Houses and the various Guilds, there was never a vote cast by your typical citizen. He shook his head at the thought. Compared to Doriel, his home and native land, Elendel's government was soft, weak, and unaccountable, filled with politicians who had glutted themselves on the taxes that came from being the Basin's only trade hub. Corruption was bound to occur. 

    No, that corruption existed wasn't surprising in the least. What he hadn't expected was the nature of it, targeting the Governor to undisclosed ends. How had Binks gotten himself involved in that? Everyone knew the Senator was someone who frankly couldn't keep his mouth shut, and he wasn't half clever enough to orchestrate something like this on his own. No, whoever had arranged this knew that Binks would be caught, or at least knew it was a possibility. The Senator had been played for a fool, as had the Noble House of Gungan that he represented.

    Perhaps the chaos was the purpose? Alendi wouldn't have been surprised. There was no end to the plans that could be furthered by this, with all the Senators kept from their staff and turning on each other one by one. Perhaps it was one of the bloc leaders trying to get rid of competition? Or a pesky political party trying to consolidate power and legitimize itself as an institution? He'd figure it out sooner or later. When he did, he resolved to pass along his thanks.

    He had come to the city expecting long and painful negotiations with the Senate, prepared to fend off attack after attack targeted at Doriel's new trade infrastructure that jeopardized Elendel's natural monopoly. Now, though? All of that was out the window. Now he had leverage. Now he had power. If he could stop the collapse of Elendel, the favors he'd earn of the Noble Houses alone would be enough to block any economic sanctions. If he could play this right... the possibilities were limitless.

    He walked to the Senate building with his suitcase still in hand. He was packed already for his trip to the city, so he had a head start on the other Senators. Best to make the most of it - Elendel was falling, and it was time for Doriel to rise in its stead.


    Couldn't miss a rerun of my very first SE game. I'm back as well :) 

    Sources: https://coppermind.net/wiki/Elendel_Basin#Politics and https://coppermind.net/wiki/Doriel

    6

  5. I'm still behind and working on catching up (sorry about that), but having skimmed the current thread I would note that Cadcom was killed by the Elims last night. Cadcom was, as I recall, someone Rand directed suspicion onto, and I'm wondering why the Elims would target him.

    The only thing I can think of is that assuming Rand flips Elim, Cadcom looks relatively cleared, but this doesn't make much since as there are other more thoroughly cleared individuals that they could have targeted instead.

    Perhaps they're afraid El would revive the more active contributors in the interests of keeping the game engaging? This seems implausible, but I'm unsure as to the alternative. The only other guess I have is that if they start targeting active contributors, their own active contributors (who obviously aren't targeted) begin to stick out. It seems that there are a lot of ways to interpret their motive in using their kill that way, but it strikes me as something that could give us a good degree of insight into their thought process

    0

  6. Ok. Going to continue my analysis

    Quote

    The elims know who is good and bad, yes, but the village doesn't. Anyone attaining a status of 'confirmed villager' will become a major target for the elims as that person is highly unlikely to be lynched. If Wesley instead remains alive untill the late game, revealing his role could help narrow down the suspect list even more. 

    - Randuir

    That's a rather big "if", Rand. Waiting until late game, when there's a solid chance Wesley will die before then, merely postpones the village getting information

    Quote

    You said in your post that you'd be willing to lynch Eternum for his suspicions last Day, but I find HH more suspicious based on his position in the bandwagon and the reasoning he gave for it. Why do you find Eternum more suspicious than HH?

    -Elenion

    As I said before, I'm reading HH as very village. This merely helps that, knowing that Len flipped Elim

    Quote

    So I did this analysis of Fifth because I was suspicious of him. I intend to to more analyses as the game continues, I just wanted to do his first. I still have that suspicion, so Fifth Scholar. Depending on your response, I may remove my vote, but for now it is stuck right there.

    -CadCom

    Hm. Could you explain what evidence in your post made that suspicion occur? You sort of went back and forth in your analysis, and I had no way how it would conclude until I saw your vote

    Quote

    I've talked about CadCom before when I voted on him. I can see his explanation for it being a bit of a D1 joke-vote, but an elim would probably say the same thing. His analysis of Fifth is interesting, but I have a bit of trouble seeing how he comes to his conclusion. Unless I'm mistaken, he puts a bunch of stuff down as NAI, as well as some stuff as village or elim that seems to balance out. @Cadmium Compounder, could you maybe make a short summary of your long analysis post in which you explain what made you decide Fifth was suspicious?

    -Rand

    ...I swear, I had no memory of this post from my previous read-through when I made mine

    Quote

    His reasons for voting Araris look reasonable, given that he'd decided to focus on that group because they where the loudest discussion. His response to suspicion from elenion seems very village on tone. I'd also expect an elim to be scrambling for ways to get the suspicion off hi, or finding ways to turn it against someone else, rather than acknowledging it as fair.

    I'm reading him neutral for now, and hope to see more content from him to be able to refine that read.

    -Rand

    Any reason you don't read him as village? I feel like you listed a few village things, and then came to a conclusion of neutral

    Quote

    Villagers actually do have it, while elims cannot. However, they can appear to have it. The difference is that elims have to plan it all out, thus making it more likely to seem "artificial" if they're not careful. Also, it coincidentally takes more time. It takes an obscene amount of effort to make something sound genuine if it's not. So, any posts like as CadCom's should be thoroughly scrutinized. All posts, imo, should be thoroughly scrutinized, but if I'm not willing to do something then I won't genuinely suggest it, and I lack both the patience and time necessary to do such a thing

    -Eternum

    This is the case, yes. That actually brings up something interesting - CadCom didn't, as far as I saw, have a distinct train of thought from one point to another, he addressed each of Fifth's posts in isolation and then made a conclusion that didn't seem predictable based on his analysis. This could be an error in attempting to portray progression of thought, possibly.

    Quote

    I think I’ve told you this before, but I don’t have a better idea of what I’m doing than most people here. I’ve only been playing for a few months more than you have, and most people here that aren’t brand new have a lot more experience than I do. 

    -Fifth

    In your first game you did well enough I didn't believe you were a new player. I think you're a bit hard on yourself :P 

    Quote

    While I felt worst about the way Len jumped on Bugsy, Araris wasn’t looking the greatest to me either, so in addition to information gathering I also voted based off my slightly bad read of Araris. Had I been voting for pure information, I would likely have voted Bugsy, as his flip would give more info on Araris and Len than Araris’ flip. Again, I’m not really sure how you see this as Elim-y. 

    -Fifth

    I'm reading this as village. Fifth had an opportunity to create chaos by boosting me and Aonar to similar levels of votes, which could have meant we wasted 2 turns lynching Aonar and then me. Instead, he expressed suspicion of Len (and thereby a degree of trust to me) and voted for Aonar to get information without killing me or letting Eliminators manipulate to do so. That feels like a village train of thought, especially knowing what we know of Len's alignment

    Quote

    I’m more in the camp that information on vote manipulation is only useful if it’s somehow traceable to the vote manipulators

    -Fifth

    This is very true

    Quote

    Eh. Admitting guilt isn’t really alignment indicative either way unless it’s a straight-up confession. It would have been stupid of me to try to distance myself from the Araris lynch, regardless of my alignment, given my earlier comments.

    -Fifth 

    While true, some Elims have a hard time doing it genuinely. They'll be over the top or far too reserved, instead of it feeling natural. I'm not convinced it's alignment indicative for you, but it could be for others

    Quote

    On another note, you can't be consistent if you don't know your own playstyle!

    -Eternum

    Not knowing your playstyle means you don't know what to avoid :P 

    "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." - Sun Tzu

    Quote

    I've been throwing a fair amount of shade around this cycle, but for now I'll vote for my first (and biggest) suspicion, Elenion.

    -Eternum

    Hmmmmm. This is an interesting dynamic. Given that Len was defending Eternum earlier (although possibly out of an effort to pin HH?), I could read it as distancing, but I don't think it is. It wound up resulting in Elenion's lynch, and I don't think his team would bus him this early

    Quote

    My biggest problem with Len's read of Araris is that Araris made a joke. The post that gave Bugsy a miniscule elim read was apparently taken by Len as a village tell for some reason, when it should be completely NAI as simply humor and nothing more. I might be tunneling at this point though, so I'll go to sleep and look at everything again in a new light tomorrow

    -Eternum

    Doubling down on Len makes me less suspicious of Eternum. He could have backed off instead of defending his stance, and he'd still have something to point to as evidence that he once expressed suspicion of Len once he flipped Elim. He did leave himself an out in terms of the next day's analysis, but I'm reading it as if Eternum and Elenion aren't w/w, and since we know Len was an Elim I have a slight village on Eternum

    Quote

    If Bugsy and Araris turn out to both be village, I would not be surprised if the elims didn't feel a need to ensure that Araris hung. HH and Fifth Scholar especially hadn't said much that day cycle, so if either of them are evil with a village Bugsy, they would not have been obliged to decide which way the mislynch swung. An evil Bugsy would put more suspicion on them, I think. It would also make it more likely that the dagger wielder works for Prince Humperdinck.

    -Devotary 

    I rather agree with this. I don't think HH or Fifth are Elims, based on previous analysis, and this provides some good reasoning to back it up. 

    Also, I don't really have any strong opinion of Devotary, for some reason. I'm not getting a good read

    Quote

    Analysis for me is hard. I'm trying to read everyone's posts, but so many different lines of thoughts have me confused. I should probably grab a paper, or open a Word document, and write down some stuff

    -Val

    That can be useful. I also (obviously :P) find it rather useful to do a long series of multi-quotes so I can respond on a point by point basis

    Quote

    Right now the best info lynch would probably be Fifth, because then we could get reads on CadCom and Rathmaskal, plus any other players that Fifth interacted with. However, Fifth is a good analyst, and I don't think I'm willing to kill them for the sake of info alone. Maybe for the points against them, but not solely as an info lynch. Right now I'm going to hold my ground on HH being suspicious, but if I don't get any support in the next 11 or so hours I'll switch my vote to someone else with an analysis-based vote on them (right now Fifth or Eternum), because I have to work from then until turnover.

    -Elenion

    ...I feel like this has to have some bearing on alignment of Fifth and Eternum, but I'm not confident my analysis is up to it - this is prime WIFOM territory

    Quote

    So there was an RP that I didn't paste. Basically this post gives me a moderate village read on Len. Reasoning: He is provding information that would be beneficial to Elims if it was kept secret. At least this early in the game. 

    -CadCom

    What information is that?

    Quote

    Overall, I feel the response wasn't thought out enough to be Certainly Elim, but it also was thought out too much to make it a certain village response. combined with all the other posts so far, I am going to put you as very slight elim, like 51-53% Very small

    -CadCom

    Hmm. I would have considered that aspect relatively minor compared to other avenues of suspicion against Len that you took to be NAI, but this is showing progression of thought and leading you to the correct conclusion, so I don't find it suspicious. Just interesting to see the thought process

    Quote

    I told Fifth Scholar That I would remove my vote from him, so I am going to do that. I will, for now change it to Elenion. But please, Before anyone else votes Elenion, Do an analysis of Bugsy. I noticed that today, there has been a lot more discussion on Elenion than on Bugsy. First, everyone thought he was the man in black, then he said he wasnt. I want to point out that my vote on him is from D1 information, and not much from d2, because I was running out of time. 

    I will try to get back to this later today. So Hold tight, Len, My vote might change

    -CadCom

    I... don't know what to think of this. On one hand, you keep an out for yourself and request that others don't vote on Len, but on the other you vote on him yourself.  Anyone else have more insight into this post? It feels like it relies on a lot of context, and I'm interested in seeing other interpretations

    Quote

    It's almost a 5 way tie for first. All I have to do at this point is remove my vote. And Honestly, I'm considering moving my vote to Bugsy after I analyse his posts more closely. If I do that, then it would become a 6 way tie...

    -CadCom

    So, CadCom's vote puts Len in the lead with 2, and he leaves an avenue open to make it a widespread tie at 1. This sort of goes with the previous. Anyone have any insight?

    Quote

    However, I do note that Bugsy hasn't really posted much today apart from speculation about the dread pirates identity. @Bugsy, do you have any current suspicions that you are willing to share with us?

    -Rand

    Sorry about that. Hope this post helps :P 

    Quote

    A quick intermezzo , regarding something I only just noticed on a re-read. HH apparently knew that Roadwalker wasn't Max, which makes me elan a bit mroe village on him. I can't really figure out why the elims would have hit roadwalker unless they believed his Max claim and wanted him out of the picture quickly, so if HH had been an elim and knew that, then I can't figure out why they would have hit him anyway. @Hemalurgic Headshot, did Roadwalker say anything else in that PM that could explain why the elims would have hit him?

    -Rand

    Glad to see HH getting some defense. I had noticed that myself, and I'm pretty solidly village on him

    Quote

    Well! I was the Man in Black

    -Val

    Ok, I suppose my solid village reads are now Val, Fifth, and HH

    Quote

    He's also making me paranoid because he seems to really know his stuff, but I'm just going to assume he did a bunch of reading in advance. I found it odd how apologetic he seemed about the Araris lynch before Araris had even flipped, and how odd he found the kill on Kidpen. He wouldn't be the first new player to be put off by the general bloodthirstyness of this game though.

    -Rand

    To be fair, I found the kill odd as well. It seemed as if the kill, being the only vig kill of the game, would have been better used on a target of suspicion, but *shrug*

    Quote

    My current elim reads are Devotary, Straw, Elenion and Eternum, more or less in that order form most to least suspicious, but I have no hard suspicions on any of them right now. In fact, I'm tempted of borrowing Alvrons trick from MR29 and rolling a  4-sided die. I won't do that though. I'm going to vote on Devotary, as his slight defense of Araris still feels off to me, and partly because process of elimination drops the other 3 for this cycle at least. I feel like I end up lynching straw just about every time I've got no better idea, I've got a PM with Eternum that's given me a not-horrible gut-read, and I feel like Elenions posts today have been better than what made me initially suspicious of him.

    -Rand

    Hmm. Could you cite some specific stuff Devotary has said? Like I said, I'm having trouble getting a read.

    With regards to Straw, I haven't seen much alignment indicative stuff myself, although in retrospect Elenion's reaction to CadCom's random vote on Straw is very amusing if Len and Straw are w/w

    Quote

    There's really only so much you can gather in the first cycle or two regarding anyone's allegiance, regardless of what they say in a thread.  I'm relatively certain that the majority of the people here are skilled enough in this game that they can manage a considerable amount of deceit via what, in this situation, is a text-based social deduction game. 

    -Rath

    While true, especially compared to people who don't do SE (I'm not particularly good, here, and I decimate my classmates in Werewolf, as I'm sure you'd all do as well :P), there is still grounds for analysis and use of text based analysis. If you ignore it the first cycle, you start the second in the same position. You essentially have to make a down payment on analysis the first few cycles of the game, and hope it pays off.

    Quote

    Between two different games, I could legitimately just copy/pasta certain responses and if everything is taken at face value, it would appear my allegiances between the two games would be the same. 

    -Rath

    Big assumption :P

    Very few things are taken at face value here. Everything is situational

    Quote

    So, I don't think it would be very helpful if I attempt to break down what people say, especially since I'm not nearly as familiar with everyone else as most of you are with each other.

    -Rath

    Only way to get better is to practice. Besides, that'll let us get a feel for you :P 

    Quote

    This is a situation where actions speak louder than words.  The recent comment regarding these games being rather bloodthirsty at the start does have be second-guessing this vote a bit, but I'm not sure why anyone would want to put the literary nail in someone's coffin like was done.  My thoughts are that at least one, likely 2 or 3, of the people who voted for Araris on day one is bound to be elim.

    -Rath

    I... very much disagree that it's likely 2 or 3. Given that Araris and I were the 2 leading candidates, the Elims didn't have much of an investment in selecting the target, and I doubt they'd all tie themselves so explicitly to a lynch they knew would flip village

    Quote

    Rand: You're taking the approach I often do in live games (and try to do consistently) of just providing consistent analysis for as long as possible before actually trying to take a side.  I'm sure it's by design so that you can continue to utilize the strategy in all games, regardless of whether village or elim, but I have little to no read on you.

    -Rath

    Meta analysis already? Nice :P

    Quote

    HH: Elenion's initial analysis on the day 1 lynching had me leaning elim here as well...  I still can't discount the analysis, but as Elenion's allegiance falls into question, it's also time to look for counter-evidence.

    -Rath

    What're your thoughts on this now?

    Quote

    The difference in tone from day 1 to day 2 is interesting.  Seems like once Araris was out of the game, Bugsy was able to take a step back and become a bit more calm.

    -Rath

    This was actually more to do with RL stuff, but the change in tone is a fair note

    Quote

    With a mere two items used(though my vote will ensure that more are needed), we could lose up to five players to today's lynch. As interesting as it might be to have lots of people die, it seems like it would be easy for the elims to minimize their risk by using daggers and rum to move or remove votes. I'd rather avoid a massacre of villagers, so I'll vote Sart for now

    -Devotary

    I've known Elims to express ignorance of the rules before, and since this post claims that Devotary is making things harder for the Elims when it's actually based on a misunderstanding, I'm not going to take it as alignment indicative. Also, I find it interesting that Devotary switched to Sart instead of Len.

    Quote

    I think that Bugsy had ample opportunity to defuse the situation and didn’t, which is something that I thought was noteworthy. He explained himself, yes, but focused more on the fact that Araris was going after him than the original issue.

    -Mr Doctor

    The "original issue" was nothing more than a bad joke, so I didn't really want to focus on that :P 

    In all seriousness, though, I did say I was far more suspicious of Len than Araris, and I feel that in retrospect my continuing to vote on Len was fully justifiable :P 

    Quote

    No, I meant that our hypothetical elim!Bugsy organised a trap by trying to bait one of the aggressive Villagers, and Araris happened to step into it. They wouldn’t have known whom to coordinate against until someone sprung the trap

    -Mr Doctor

    My post originally addressed Araris, not Len, so I'm not sure how that could have been baiting Len and accidentally getting Araris?

    Quote

    Alright, this makes a lot of sense. An alternative theory is then that Elims can reveal information over a period of time in order to simulate progression of thought, but I guess that it’s probably very hard to fake. Yeah, you make a very good point.

    -Mr Doctor

    A side note is that this makes it easier for new players who are Elims, because they can show progression of thought with regards to game mechanics

    Quote

    I think that I’ve been convinced that voting is good, because we’ve got a lot of information out of the first lynch.

    -Mr Doctor

    We seem to have this discussion every game, but I'm glad it went faster this one than most :P 

    Quote

    It wasn't my item. It could have been Bugsy defending himself

    -Sart

    Wasn't me :P 


    Ok, there's my analysis for C2. C3 coming as soon as I can do it, but class is about to end again so I need to return the computer

    2

  7. Hello, everyone

    I've finished reading cycle 2, and I really don't seem to be in a good spot for analysis right now. I'm not sure what's wrong, but I seem to read things without them registering and nothing is really clear. I did notice that votes were thrown around at a lot of different people and from a lot of different sources, so I'm hoping to diagram those out and analyze it at some point - it seems like that could either show real suspicion or be a distancing mechanism, and analysis to see which is which would be very helpful. I plan on doing this later. 

    I haven't taken a look at anything in cycle 3 (I opened this thread and scrolled immediately to post without reading anything, because I know I'm not prepared to take a good look at anything and I don't want to be sucked in :P), so if there's anything I was supposed to respond to, I apologize. I'll attempt to do so either tonight or tomorrow, although the latter looks more feasible, since I'm leaving for a friend's grad party in 10 minutes, and won't be home until after the after party, so it's unlikely I'll get a chance to look at much else until tomorrow.

    Sorry again for my relative lack of activity, but with any luck my contribution should pick up soon. Next week is finals week for me, but because of my schedule I don't actually have any exams - all of them are projects I've already completed or tests I've already taken, which means I'll have a lot of downtime for this.

    0

  8. Ok, I'm in the progress of reading through the cycle now. I'll add comments as I think of things.

    Firstly, I have a pretty strong village read on @Hemalurgic Headshot. He confirmed for us that Roadwalker had falsely claimed Miracle Max, and since the Eliminators killed Roadwalker I would imagine none of them knew that he had been lying. After all, had they known, they could have kept him alive and let the village be unsure of his alignment. By killing him when they knew he was lying, they'd lose an information advantage and would also lose the ability to fabricate a controversy over Roadwalker's fake claim.  

    Secondly, @Elbereth, this'll be interesting with you as Max. Good call on waiting to claim, too :P. (Also you have to teach me how to use Iambic Pentameter at some point. I got halfway through before realizing I was reading it at the specific cadence, and I'm deeply impressed)

    Thirdly, in retrospect, I'm a bit surprised by Rand's suspicion of Cadcom. Cadom's vote was... poorly thought out, true, but Rand has explicitly acknowledged that he's accustomed to looking for the sort of elim tells that would be present in the championship, and I don't think the sort of thing Cadcom did would be seen there at all. His vote was rather transparent and precipitated entirely on a misconception/faulty analysis. Any elim I can think of would know not to vote on something so... not unsubstantial, but almost anti-substantial. Not only was it more or less baseless, it explicitly gave Straw the opportunity to respond and say that his previous posts were evidence he was village, something that wouldn't happen naturally without this sort of accusation. I suppose if they're working together, it'd be possible, but I doubt that he's an elim if Straw isn't.

    Fourthly, @randuir is a tricky case for me. His analysis, especially during the first cycle, seemed designed to air out as much as possible. His use of Socratic questioning was actually quite helpful for me, I'll admit. At the same time, though, it seemed a rather noncommittal way to fan the flames of my argument with Len.  Had he not also brought up the argument about Cadcom, I'd be much more suspicious of him, ironically enough. He did, however, introduce a new suspicion and follow it with a vote, even when Araris and I were already up for a lynch, which makes me believe he was likely not fanning the flames for the purpose of getting us lynched, but rather to get us to talk more and potentially provide the village with more clues. Slight village read. 

    Fifthly, Mr. Doctor, your analysis is very impressive. I'll quote a section of it below to respond to:

    Quote

    Something that is bugging me is the neutrality of his arguments. Do players often sit in the background and offer analysis like this? Doc seems very nice and entirely neutral, which is making an alarm bell ring somewhere for me. Almost everyone else who posts an equivalent amount justified their votes a decent amount. Doc didn’t spend especially long on his initial argument against Araris, and spent far more time on analyses of everyone else. That looks like him focusing more on building trust and interaction with everyone else, and less on the outcome of the initial lynch.

    As for what that means, either he is Village and wants to prove that he’s engaged and trustworthy to everyone, or if he’s Elim then he’s trying to do the same thing to tie himself to everyone and become harder to lynch, and he also wasn’t especially concerned with Araris going down because he knew that Araris was a Villager.

    …Argh, this is doing my head in. I want to trust you, Doc, but I don’t know what to think.

    Doc, at least in my experience, seems rather furtive when he's an eliminator. He is (or was, at least) very preoccupied with maintaining an information imbalance, and it often became apparent that he knew more than he was letting on. It's been quite awhile since I've played with him, but there was a time when I had him down cold, and assuming his playstyle hasn't significantly changed, I'm reading him as village. 

    Sixth, and I know that this isn't the order the posts actually appeared in, but I'd like to respond to @Elbereth's post that said the following:

    Quote

    Vague suspicion on Eternum for this post and this one. Ish. Reading them over again, they're not so bad as I initally thought (as they do show progression of thought), but within the three he places suspicion on all three major suspects of yesterday. It reads  as trying to cast suspicion, realising that suspicion is infeasible, and reaching for a different easy target. Eternum

    With regards to the progression of thought you reference, I disagree that it's indicative of being village. I believe you're referring to his claim of rereading and being less sure of Araris' alignment after the vote already ended, which to me is NAI. I'd say that could possibly be a distancing technique as much as it could be progression of thought.  @Mr Doctor, I also disagree with your analysis of that. Eliminators have less progression of thought because they already know what's true, so they can't figure stuff out over time. It means they have to stage it if they're showing a change in opinion, so it's certainly not elim indicative. It's just not village indicative either, though, at least in my opinion. 

    Seventh, @Fifth Scholar , to respond to this:

    Quote

    If El is lying about being Max, the real Max will counterclaim and we can lynch her for her dishonesty. As for now, though, I’m of a mind to trust El’s claim, unless someone else refutes it. El is not the type of person to lie about something like this (I think). 

    I'd say you're pretty much correct. I don't see El falsely claiming, because the possibility of a counterclaim would make it a more risky maneuver than her usual playstyle, and because it could cause a lot of unpredictability. Her keeping a low profile C1 also helps strengthen her case. I'm inclined to believe her regarding her role as Max, although I plan on  remaining cautious :P 

    Eighth, @Elbereth again:

    Quote

    5b. Also, yesterday wasn't heated at all, in my opinion - it was a few people debating, all of whom enjoy debate (speaking of which, @Bugsy, I could really hear the MUN in your voice). I was never worried about it escalating further

    I'd agree, someone yesterday described it as heated, and I was rather surprised because personally it seemed pretty civil. Reminds me of when I first joined and got really invested in arguments, though. I suppose the culture of all being friends but still trying to kill eachother takes awhile to get used to :P 

    With regards to the MUN, any specific way you mean that? I'm pleasantly surprised to hear that.

    Class is ending, so I have to give the computer back. Will return with more analysis later.

    0

  9. 9 minutes ago, Straw said:

    As Bugsy pointed out, it’s pretty likely that Elenion is the Man in Black, due to his defense of Araris

    While this was my initial thought, I'm not really sure now. If Len were the Man in Black, I feel as if he'd likely have killed me last night, and that he'd have claimed this morning. Since neither of those is the case, I'm thinking it's someone else.

    0

  10. As the Dread Pirate Cummerbund laid eyes on the dead body of the Princess, he felt his hopes for a peaceful resolution die inside him. He had been here to avoid a war between Gilder and Florin, but now, with the death of the princess, that no longer would be possible. The war was inevitable; now, he merely needed be sure his home country of Gilder would win it. To do so would necessitate the destruction of Florin leadership; if any were allowed to maintain power, war would surely follow. Musing, he considered what advantage this could bring him. Cummerbund, King of Florin, he thought in his head. It has a certain ring to it.


    That was a really bad mislynch. It'll be hard for us to come back from this. Looking back at who defended Araris, Elenion seems to be the most obvious candidate for Dread Pirate Roberts, but as he hasn't claimed and whoever it was didn't kill me, I doubt that's the case. Other than that, I can't think of who it would be. If the ex Dread Pirate Roberts is reading this, I'd recommend you claim. Unless it's Kidpen or Roadwalker, we should be able to have a cleared village person for at least one cycle. I'm hesitant to establish a Mayor system, but with such an information disadvantage it may be a worthy trade for us to be able to set up a PM hub this night cycle, even if Roberts is killed the same night. 

    29 minutes ago, Fifth Scholar said:

    Max should abstain from giving out a ton of pills so we can get information at a faster rate

    Roadwalker had claimed Max, so there's a very good chance we lost both the vigilante, the action suppressor, and the healer all in one turn. It's deeply unfortunate that we lost Buttercup, but I think losing Max the same turn may have been for the better, specifically so the game doesn't become endlessly prolonged.

    Edit: Ninja'd by Len :ph34r:

    0

  11. Quote

    This entire Bugsy-Araris-Len exchange has been.. Interesting. Right now, I've begun to suspect that Bugsy and Araris are distancing, and while Len's "defense" of Araris seemed.. unnecessary at best, it's not a priority of mine to think about it, mainly because it could go either way. The fact that Bugsy only reacted to Araris's post (the one @Mark IV quoted) after it was brought up by someone else, despite it being a prime target for accusations, makes me uneasy. So I'll be leaving my vote on Araris for now. Depending on how he flips, if he gets lynched, I want to/will look at Rand, Bugsy and Len as the most contributing (discussion-wise) players this cycle.

    Honestly, I had somehow missed that post until I saw it quoted, which is why my response to it was delayed. It was definitely something I should have responded to, yes, which is why I did it as soon as I realized it was a thing :P 

    2 hours ago, Steeldancer said:

    REMINDER OF PM RULES: You may only make one PM per night, unless you have a Parrot. Using the Parrot does not require an action. Remember to include me in all PMs. You may not make Group PMs. Thank you for your cooperation. 

    To clarify, if someone makes a PM with us, may we make one of our own as well? I'd assume so, but I'd hate to accidentally break the rules.

    0

  12. 2 hours ago, Araris Valerian said:

    I didn't really have time to explain my vote on Bugsy, since I made it right before I went to bed, but his post about me seemed to be hedging unnecessarily. A 1% change in alignment read isn't helping anyone out, so why even mention it?

    You are aware I was asked about what I thought of it, yes? I quoted the asking post in my own, so I'm not sure how you missed it if not. When people ask me questions, I'm going to be honest and thorough. That's why I mentioned it.

    This seems more like an accusation of convenience than a legitimately meant one. Why are you voting for me for responding to a question fully? Also, why did you neglect to consider the fact that it was a response to a question in your support for your vote?

    0

  13. 38 minutes ago, randuir said:

    Let's say that a villager got lynched, and you're suspicious of two people who voted on that villager. One of the two provided decent reasons for voting that person when he voted, but hadn't really mentioned the person at all before that. The other had been talking about his suspicions well in advance of that person even becoming a lynch target. Which one would you be more suspicious of?

    Hmm. I would be less suspicious of the person who discussed their suspicions well in advance, yes, because they knowingly put themselves at risk of suspicion if a mislynch occurred. Thing is, in the specific case of what I said, there's very little basis for my "suspicion". As I said, I was almost certain it was NAI, so I wouldn't think that puny advance justification would in any way provide actionable counterweight to the fact that I'd have called him out twice for virtually no good reason.

    23 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    His post was carefully worded so it didn't look like he was casting suspicion, but as an elim I've used wording like that to justify a future vote. As village I'm one of our more aggressive players, so as elim I duplicate that to be consistent. Elim!Len is the type to go out looking for mislynches, and Bugsy's move is the a set-up for that sort of playstyle. I know it because as an elim I do it. Bugsy's accusation of Araris didn't put him on the vote tally, but by making a NAI or slightly-village move look evil he threw suspicion Araris' way and set himself up for a vote later if an Araris lynch got going, without putting him in a position to take flak if Araris flipped village.

    How was that at all "without putting [myself] in a position to take flak"? Also, as I said, what motive would I as an elim have to cast suspicion C1 when I could just hang back and wait for the village to mislynch without my help? I'm not saying I'd avoid voting, but I'd definitely not call out something like that and draw attention to myself. Also, you say Elim!Len is the type to go out looking for mislynches, and given that I know I'm a villager, that's really not making you less suspicious in my eyes. You saw someone else address a suspicion against me, and saw a vote that was already on me, then you piled on, tying me for the lead. That seems to fit your claimed Elim M.O.; you look for a mislynch and act aggressively, using preexisting justification (in this case one not created by you) to back your vote. 

    0

  14. 11 minutes ago, randuir said:

    The advantage that it would convey is that it gives you a progression to your vote on Araris. Araris is taking a bit of heat because he suddenly voted you without explanation, while if he'd had a prior suspicion stated, he could easily point back to that when making the vote as an explanation. So it's definitely in the elims interest to seem to be working towards a vote, rather than just jump on the nearest available bandwagon.

    He could also have given the explanation in the post giving the vote, no? I see why providing an explanation helps, but fail to see why doing so well in advance does, I suppose. Like I said, I think the fact that the elim would essentially be voting twice for the same person, drawing more attention, outweighs any benefit you might get. 

    0

  15.  

    24 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    This is exactly what you did: you got on, saw that Araris had said something questionable, and called attention to it.

    ....okay? I'm not sure what you're going for.

    5 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    As you said, elims have no incentive to vote this early.

    ...in the post you quote I literally said "Wouldn't it make much more sense to vote back on him because he had voted on me and simply wait to retract until he did so as well?"

    I don't know where you're getting your thoughts that I said the Elims have no incentive to vote. I said they have no incentive to direct the vote. I elaborated on that here:

    Quote

    I stated that Elims have little to no incentive in selecting the target of the vote themselves, as is done by anyone introducing a new suspicion on another player, but as suspicion had already been cast on me they could more easily add on without appearing to be the originators of the idea. It's sort of the concept of diffusion of responsibility; I don't believe Elims avoid voting - in fact, as I said, I feel the ideal elim response to Araris' poke vote would have been to return a vote and then mutually back off - but I do believe that they will avoid being the first to identify someone as suspicious, at least this early in the game.

    What I did with Araris goes directly against this.

    22 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    You did not put a vote down on Araris, but you provided yourself with a way to vote on him later. Your statement made him into a "target of opportunity" that an elim!Bugsy could vote on.

    Had I done that, I would have been both the originator of the suspicion and the first voter, in 2 separate posts. There's no way that would be beneficial, at all. Targets of opportunity become targets of opportunity because they have an appearance of consensus behind them. What you propose would just make me appear to be tunneling. 

    30 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    I didn't do the opportunistic set-up for a later vote; I put my vote down right away.

    I'd disagree that the "set up" was in any way opportunistic. What actual advantage did it convey? It's not as if it set me up to vote later; I could have voted later anyways, and this just would have drawn twice the attention to it - once in my original post, and again in my post with the actual vote. Also, I'd note that my entire point is that Elims don't want to provide the "opportunistic set-up". They wait for someone else to provide the basis for a vote and follow up on someone else's suspicion, divorcing themselves from the responsibility and creating a false sense of consensus. I did exact opposite.

    34 minutes ago, Elenion said:

    I also didn't think you had good reason to vote on Araris

    I fully admitted it wasn't a good reason, hence why I didn't vote.

    If I hadn't included the comment and then "literally nothing else" happened this cycle, as I said in the original post, then there would be nothing stopping me from following through without the advance warning. If something did happen, then I wouldn't have voted on him at all and would have avoided the extra attention. There is no feasible reason for me to do this as an eliminator. As an eliminator, it can only be a burden. As a villager, however, that let me demonstrate my attentions to the village, which doesn't help me individually but would arguably help us as a whole. The village begins with an information disadvantage. Sharing our thought processes can only help, where with eliminators it's a far more risky proposition. That is why I included the statement, not because it provided me any semblance of advantage.

    0

  16. 6 minutes ago, randuir said:

    @Bugsy, you stated that you don't think elims will vote early to attract attention to themselves. Both Araris' and Elenion's votes attracted quite a bit of attention, especially at this stage. If one or both of them are elims, do you think there's a reason for them to be moving more agressively?

    I stated that Elims have little to no incentive in selecting the target of the vote themselves, as is done by anyone introducing a new suspicion on another player, but as suspicion had already been cast on me they could more easily add on without appearing to be the originators of the idea. It's sort of the concept of diffusion of responsibility; I don't believe Elims avoid voting - in fact, as I said, I feel the ideal elim response to Araris' poke vote would have been to return a vote and then mutually back off - but I do believe that they will avoid being the first to identify someone as suspicious, at least this early in the game.

    I believe Elenion's vote has attracted attention primarily because it was a bit hypocritical; under normal circumstances, an Elim following up a village suspicion with a vote simply gives the appearance of consensus, which is a powerful factor. Araris', meanwhile, avoided making any firm statement of suspicion, which means he can very easily back off if it goes south. He merely said that someone had to be lynched first, which means if I'm lynched and revealed to be a villager he can just shrug. Either of those actions allow Elims to more easily divest responsibility

    0

  17. 4 minutes ago, Mr Doctor said:

    However, Elenion has offered helpful posts earlier, and appears to be well-engaged in this game. Since the vote against Bugsy only a small part of his activity so far, and the bulk of it has been discussion on the game mechanics, I’m more willing to trust him to try and move things along with a vote.

    @Elenion, what do you think of this argument? I'm still suspicious of you, but this raises a good point. At the same time, I'd argue the same could be held true for me, and I'm hesitant to withdraw my vote when you're engaging in what I feel is suspicious behavior.

    6 minutes ago, Mr Doctor said:

    I don’t like the way that Araris and Elenion jumped on Bugsy in the way that they did. Bugsy made an innocent statement that didn't seem at all suspicious from a technical standpoint, and justified it well with a follow-up post, but they haven't yet rescinded their votes.

    Not only that, Araris did rescind his poke vote after my initial post in response, and placed it back soon thereafter. That seems a bit suspicious to me; he rescinded his vote to make it look as if he weren't sticking to his guns on a poke vote, and then placed it back once I became an acceptable target of suspicion. I'm curious as to why. @Araris Valerian, care to provide an explanation? 

    Updated vote count:

    Walin (1): Mark IV

    Devotary of Spontaneity (2): Val, Fifth

    Bugsy (2): Araris, Elenion

    Araris (2): Eternum, Mr Doctor

    Elenion (1): Bugsy

    0

  18. 8 hours ago, Elenion said:

    Bugsy, because I agree with Rand that you looked very opportunistic there, and because I'm not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment. Araris' post is NAI at worst and slightly village at best

    Were I attempting to be opportunistic, wouldn't it make much more sense to vote back on him because he had voted on me and simply wait to retract until he did so as well? I could simply have flown beneath the radar. As an elim, I certainly wouldn't be calling attention to something that minor this early in the game, especially because the elims have no incentive to direct the vote this early; it's very unlikely we'll hit an elim day one, so they can just stay back and later vote on targets of opportunity after skating beneath the radar. 

    Speaking of, isn't this sort of what you're doing? I said Araris' post was NAI, but slighly Elim at worst. You say this is opportunistic, although I fail to see it at all as advantageous. Then, as you accuse me of being opportunistic, you do the very same thing, saying you're voting for me because you're "not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment". You're acting in a far more opportunistic manner than I am, voting on someone who's already leading in votes for an infraction you admit is minor and for something you yourself have done. I did not even vote in mine, leading to absolutely no influence on the lynch, much less on someone eliminators would deem an acceptable target because I'm already subject to suspicion

    Elenion, you currently appear to be the best choice for a lynch to me.

    EditL Just realized I wasn't leading in votes, but as this tied me for the lead I believe the point stands. Here's an updated votecount, far as I can figure it:

    Walin (1): Mark IV

    Devotary of Spontaneity (2): Val, Fifth

    Bugsy (2): Araris, Elenion

    Araris (1): Eternum

    Elenion (1): Bugsy

    0

  19. 6 hours ago, randuir said:

    Just for my understanding Bugsy, do you actually think Araris slipped up there as an elim, thinking that the pirates where evil? You seem to be saying here that you'll only consider it suspicious if no one else does something more suspicious, which sounds a bit opportunistic

    No, I'm just about certain it was a joke, and that it's almost completely NAI. If it is indicative of alignment at all, though, I'd say it's more indicative of being evil than not. If I have everyone at 50% village read to start, it might move him to 49%, say. Certainly not enough to lynch on with any semblance of comfort 

    0

  20. 26 minutes ago, randuir said:

    Edit: Oh, another thing to consider is that people's role and alignment doesn't get revealed upon being mostly dead. This means that we get our lynch results with a delay of a single cycle. @Steeldancer, if someone mostly dead gets hit by a kill, do they die immediately? In the description of Spaniard it is mentioned that killing someone mostly dead does count for his win-con, but I can't actually find any rules for what will happens in that case?

    I don't recall where this was, but I remember Steel making a statement that someone killing a mostly dead player takes precedence over the pill, because the kill is earlier in the order of actions.

    0