Jump to content

Long Game 88: Blood and Bloody Ashes!


Recommended Posts

If it was a forsaken on Conq, why would they be voting to save Illwei if she’s a villager? Perhaps both Conq and Illwei were/are villagers, so the split up on the wagons was to raise up multiple misyeets in the future?

But if it was the Amyrlin, then where did the extra vote go? The Amyrlin would have not voted, so I don’t think it would be that.

 Another possibility is that compulsion was used to save Conq, but the question arises again of where the extra vote went. 
 

 

Also damn I really thought that Illwei was gonna flip purple.:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Conquestor said:

Also, Sart, don't think I forgot about you posting once and voting on me.

It’s Night, so unless I’m missing something completely you can’t vote :P 

1 hour ago, Vorros said:

But if it was the Amyrlin, then where did the extra vote go? The Amyrlin would have not voted, so I don’t think it would be that.

I think the Amrylin’s vote only doubles if there’s a tie, and there wasn’t one, it was 4-3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I actually sped read that part of the rules, so yeah. Apparently there won't be an execution tonight. My bad. Still, I think Sart was rather suspicious. Now I'm going to take some time to read through Illwei's posts and see if I can't find anything out. I'll try and write up as detailed of a report as I can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

It’s Night, so unless I’m missing something completely you can’t vote :P 

I think the Amrylin’s vote only doubles if there’s a tie, and there wasn’t one, it was 4-3

Technically, it doesn’t double, it counts as a 1.5 vote, so it won't appear in the VC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shining Silhouette said:

Is it elimy to low post in other games (or even this game :ph34r:)?

Low posting looks like hiding/avoiding suspicion, and it's highly unhelpful to the village because it gives us nothing to analyze. However, it's also typical new player behavior, so I don't find you particularly suspicious. 

 

7 hours ago, Shining Silhouette said:

So if the Amyrlin voted Illwei, one of either Devo, Conq, Vorros, and Luckspren is the Amyrlin. If it was a Forsaken missing vote, the Forsaken is either Araris, Sart, or Xino. I feel like it wouldn't make sense for the villagers to use Compulsion this early when there's not too much to go off of, so I feel like for me this action would be done by an elim.

One of those possibilities is a genuine vote on Illwei, the next is that a forsaken struck against Conq in-thread to get others to vote them out or they voted trying to blend in with all the backlash against conq, and the final is (probably out of the two imo) an elim using compulsion to vote Illwei or save Conq or (not so probably imo) a vil using compulsion to add another vote on illwei or save conq because they're sure of their innocence/guilt (which I think is premature at this point). Tell me if I'm missing obvious scenarios; I'm just trying to make sense of what could be going on.

The Amyrlin thing doesn't apply because it wasn't a tie. It was a Forsaken or Compulsion. Here's every possibility I can come up with:

A Forsaken could've been: 1. Supporting the Conq lynch  2. Worried about being labeled a Forsaken for not voting  3. Trying to cast suspicion on the other two Conq voters.

Compulsion could've been: 4. Conq self-preservation  5. elims saving Conq  6. villager saving Conq. Implications of those options:

1. Conq is Village

2. At least one of <Araris, Sart, Xino> is Elim, and they all voted on Conq, so Conq is Village

3. Exactly one of <Araris, Sart, Xino> is Elim, the other two are Village, and Conq is Village

4. Conq is an Aes Sedai. He's also not particularly desperate to survive, if he was relying on an action with only 40% chance of success to save him, AND he didn't move the vote to Illwei, but simply took it off. Seems villagery, but not at all certain. The Forsaken is someone who didn't vote, so <Shining, Wizard>.

5. Conq is Elim. The vote manip was probably done by the Forsaken to make sure it went through. Either the Forsaken didn't vote, so F: <Shining, Wizard> OR

5.2 the Forsaken moved a vote from Conq to whoever the Forsaken voted for, covering the Forsaken's tracks and casting suspicion on the Conq voter pool. Forsaken: <Shining, Wizard> because they didn't vote, <Araris, Sart, Xino> because then the vote tally would be 3 and we wouldn't be having this conversation. That leaves <Conq, Devo, Mat, Vorros> as the possible Forsaken.

5.3 the stuff with the Forsaken Compulsion happened, but Conq is Village and it wasn't an attempt to save Conq, it was a more complicated version of 2. 

6. Someone is thoroughly convinced that Conq is village. This could be anyone but Sart, Xino, and Araris, and tells us nothing, except that someone REALLY trusts their read of Conq. 

TL;DR If Forsaken, kill Araris, Sart, or Conq; if Compulsion, kill Shining or Wizard; If Forsaken + Compulsion, kill Conq, Devo, Mat, or Vorros.

I'll post again when I've decided which one I think happened. 

 

EDIT: Amyrlin Seat does apply.

7. Conq is Amyrlin and Village, self-preservation  8. Conq is Amyrlin and Elim, self-pres  8.5 Self-pres and throwing Forsaken suspicion on his voters  9. Village Amyrlin is convinced of Conq's innocence and trying to save him  10. Elim Amyrlin is trying to save Elim Conq  11. Elim Amyrlin is trying to throw Forsaken suspicion on voters

 

EDIT 2: 12. Amyrlin Forsaken covering their tracks

Edited by Luckspren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Luckspren said:

The Amyrlin thing doesn't apply because it wasn't a tie. It was a Forsaken or Compulsion. Here's every possibility I can come up with:

A Forsaken could've been: 1. Supporting the Conq lynch

The Amyrlin Seat has a guaranteed vote shift ability that can move or remove a vote. I don't see the Amyrlin Seat as an elim role unless there's no Forsaken since the two of them would have effectively five and a half votes.

The Forsaken would know their vote doesn't count, so them voting for Conq in #1 wouldn't mean he's village. I think you say this later though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

The Amyrlin Seat has a guaranteed vote shift ability that can move or remove a vote.

Oops. Will edit that in. Thanks. 

2 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

the two of them would have effectively five and a half votes

What?

3 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

The Forsaken would know their vote doesn't count, so them voting for Conq in #1 wouldn't mean he's village.

Right, but they would be making it look like a more viable lynch, thereby attracting more votes. Putting a vote there is still 'support' of the lynch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, sorry for not getting on yesterday. I got distracted binging Sandman. There are several questions I have in regards to yesterday. First and foremost, why did Illwei die? They had the Blademaster role, which should have given them an extra life. Am I missing something here? @The Unknown Novel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Illwei votes for wizard

Spoiler
Quote

The Wandering Wizard

I don't think this needs an explaination

Now knowing that she was referring to the amount of elims and the distribution of those elims, this makes more sense.

Luckspren responds soon after and says that she thinks it does need an explanation. Mat says that he would've asked for an explanation before but doesn't need too now since playing in MU. Neither of these responses strike me as particularly elimy.

I then vote for wizard and request the reasoning behind his vote. Araris comes in and asks why I picked Illwei's vote over his own on wizard. This seems to be some genuine questioning and concern over why I singled out Illwei verses himself. This is pretty vil leaning, but could just be him choosing to defend a vil as an elim. I'll put this specific post as vil leaning, however.

Illwei's response to my vote and other discussions

Spoiler
Quote

I don't think there's that much to talk about distro wise. Everyone seems fine calling it three elims and I think that's fine based on TUNs previous games and a history of larger elim teams over smaller ones

That also means that at least one person who has checked in is an Elim

 

  On 8/12/2022 at 0:05 PM, Araris Valerian said:

The faction kill is a physical action, according to TUN in the game approval PM.

Any thoughts on this, guys?

--

Vil: Araris, Xino

Araris/luck never e/e

Mat feels like he has tmi on luck being v.

Conquests slight e lean for adding on that I haven't posted anything since then, as someone who hasn't posted. This is the only situation where I'm going to say it was a point in your favor rn that you walked that back,  but we'll see. 

Suggests that the three elim theory is most likely accurate. I think we can save ourselves some time and just assume there are three unless some evidence comes up otherwise. Illwei also then suggests that there is a good chance that an elim has checked in at this point in the game. This may be worth coming back to.

She then makes some calls on Araris and Xino. Araris I can understand, however, at this point in time, Xino only had one post about two game rules questions. (Elim physical action and linking) Xino might've just posted the question to make it appear as though they didn't know and thus couldn't be elim. This will need some closer inspection.

She then points out that as I myself hadn't posted much, it was weird that I pointed it out about her and fair enough. What I meant, however, was that she hadn't explained her vote on wizard. I am confused about the "walked that back" thing. We'll see if I can figure out what it means later.

Araris responds by quoting the thread where he found out about the kill being a physical action. He doesn't add anything else, however.

Illwei adding extra thoughts and responds to Araris

Spoiler
Quote

Araris it was the elaborating on where you got the info part of it.

Also forgot to add, Wizard shading the double life role happened in a very awkward way imo and implies that if Wizard is an elim that they don't have one (which I would assume anyways, going with 3 elims)

  On 8/12/2022 at 1:13 PM, The Wandering Wizard said:

Blademaster can fake village if "killed"

It's the only one that doesn't make sense to me in their explaination.

She thinks that Araris telling us where he got the info is sus, I however would've done the same thing. She then adds that wizard might be an elim because he was shading the double role and might be implying that he doesn't have a double role. I would be quicker to assume that he was shading it because he might be in that situation. This may be something that requires some extra attention.

Illwei's double edit post and first Sart vote

Spoiler
Quote
  On 8/12/2022 at 2:56 PM, Matrim's Dice said:

Araris’ vote struck me as opportunistic, I was waiting to see if anyone else would vote there but I won’t be around for a few hours and wanted to get a post down.

I wouldn't call Araris' vote opportunistic, and I actually think it was villagery of him to even vote Wizard when I hadn't stated my reasoning. 

EDIT: implying that since there was no reasoning and he wasn't stating his own, there's not much to be opportunistic about there, especially because it's so soon I'm the cycle. It's more likely for someone to jump on araris for a bad follow than jump on me for no reasoning, so it's a risky move to make as an elim.

EDIT: I think I'm moving Matrim to my village leans for now.

I have a problem with this but it's a silly problem.
When matrim is village he doesn't trust me really, so finding reasons to vote me are usually very there. Here though, his immediate take is a "I can understand why your thoughts are valid, but i disagree," which to me makes it sound like he knows I'm village. An immediate disagreement would normally translate to a elim lean on me.

Anyways I guess the summary is that Matrim seems like he has TMI on a few slots- Luck, me, Wizard at the very least. (if Mat is an Elim then Wizard can also be a teammate, even though I'm not sure where I'm leaning on Wizard right now.)

Sart

Starts off by replying to Mat and says that Araris is more vil in his eyes because of his stab vote on wizard. I however would agree with Mat and would say it would be opportunistic if it wasn't for the "having to have two votes to die" rule. For this reason, I will be more suspicious of the third+ votes this game. Illwei makes a good point about Araris really putting themselves out there with their vote and thus either being bold as an elim or vil.

She then has an existential crisis about whether Mat is elim or not because of what he usually does. She does however put him in her Vil lean, so that is something. I have trouble with Mat because I want to trust him, but I also feel like he is being really manipulative under the surface, so yeah...

Sart's post is the next one after Illwei (although there was an hour and a half between the two posts, so take that with a grain of salt) and suggests myself as a "different kill candidate". Worried that much after one vote? 

Illwei reponds to Sart's vote by saying that she is okay with it despite her own vote on him. She said that the reasoning wasn't really there for the vote and called it a red flag. She did say that she has her own problems with my content and posts. (Presumably it was me "calling out her contribution" when I myself hadn't contributed that much) 

Mat responds to the post quoted above and agrees with what she says about Araris. He then talks about Illwei's crisis with himself and say that although he would normally not trust her as vil, this time he isn't. Even more curiously, he added that she shouldn't make reads on him based off of something he would normally do, if he hasn't done it yet. That is suspicious to me and warrants further looking into Mat's posts.

Luckspren then responds to Illwei and says that she would still like an explanation for the vote of Wizard. She also has a disagreement amount Illwei's assumption of Araris and herself never being elims together. Luckspren then adds that although she appreciates the amount of content Illwei is producing, she isn't able to understand most of what Illwei is saying. She then states that she may just be spewing... What is even more interesting, is that she defends Mat, votes Illwei, but then says that it could be me actually. That doesn't sound like she is taking sides, but trying to vote while leaving herself an opening to vote on me in the future. (Although I do like her current cycle's posts about what the heck happened with the votes. Luckspren, which do you think is the most likely?)

Anyways, that gets me to my long roles thoughts on page two, almost halfway through the page. I'm going to end there for now, but I will continue this later. Also, just in case you didn't read through all of that @Luckspren. Which scenario (of the twelve you presented) are most likely to be the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can the Amyrlin be a forsaken? It would be very odd for a minus vote to be a tiebreaker. It would essentially have .5 vote instead of 1.5 or 0. 
 

I’ve got some thoughts about what happened. I think that any compulsion/Amyrlin vote moving probably would have happened before Devotary’s last minute vote. As the wagons stood, any shifting would have resulted in a close call in favor of pushing Illwei over. I think that Devotary *might* be clear of being Forsaken or Amyrlin because of the late vote (a real big if here). So according to Luck’s list, If it’s a Forsaken on Illwei using Compulsion, I think it’s more likely to be Conq or Mat over Devon.

Actually the above analysis only applies to Forsaken because if it was Amyrlin manipulation it would be from a non-voter.

Wait, @Luck Spren in your list If Forsaken it should say Xino not Conq since he voted Illwei.

If it’s just compulsion, then I think that it was probably to save Conq. That means it could still be a Forsaken or elim on Illwei weaving compulsion, or it could be anyone off the Conq wagon.

If it’s just a Forsaken on Conq, I have a hard time imagining that they didn’t try to cover their tracks at all, so I think it may be a possibility that they were roleblocked? Compulsion requires a shield to block, right? Did anyone weave any shields yesterday? Does the Blademaster Roleblock include blocking weaves? Maybe Illwei pogged with her roleblock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Conquestor said:

Which scenario (of the twelve you presented) are most likely to be the case?

Reading back through my post, I think I presented the options in an unnecessarily repetitive way. The vote count change is due to Forsaken, Elim Compulsion, Village Compulsion, Conq Compulsion, or Amyrlin Manip, with possible overlap. 

Putting myself in the Forsaken's shoes, the safest thing to do would be vote on someone other than Conq and use Compulsion to move a vote from Conq to wherever I am. Assuming smart, active elims whose thought process is similar to mine, I think this is what happened. This could be an attempt to save Conq, or just self-preservation, avoiding suspicion, and throwing mud, which is what I think happened. I'm leaning towards V!Conq. 

I'm very suspicious of Elith.

Edit: Ninja'd.

Edited by Luckspren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Luckspren said:

What?

Right, but they would be making it look like a more viable lynch, thereby attracting more votes. Putting a vote there is still 'support' of the lynch. 

Those two as elims can defeat a 5 vote train. If before vote manipulation it's

Forsaken (5): Villager 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Villager (2): Forsaken, Amyrlin Seat

then after compulsion + vote shift it's

Forsaken (3): Villager 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Villager (3): Forsaken, Amyrlin Seat, Villager 1, 2

and the villager auto-dies in the tie.

Potentially, depending on vote patterns. Early votes on teammates are risky, while votes placed on at the end can scare people away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have two future plans of action. 
 

1. We yeet Conq for Info: He was the counterwagon and a vote was moved that acted in his favor. It lets us understand if Illwei was to save him or not if he is an Elim. It also may limit the possibilities of where the Forsaken is. If he is a villager, then we can decide if the vote movement was village motivated to push Illwei over, whether the Forsaken was trying to cast suspicion on the Conq wagon, or if the Forsaken messed up the Compulsion due to some reason. I think there are more worlds where Conq is town here (also colored by the fact that I didn’t have an e read on him to begin with), but it would essentially be an info flip and make our future shots and tests more accurate hopefully. 
 

2: We do our normal hunting and vote elimmy players. Sart had a bad vote onto Conq (who is likely V), and also has Forsaken equity. If compulsion can switch a vote to no-vote, it’s possible that the Forsaken stayed off completely and just removed a vote to cast suspicion as well. If it is one of the no voters then I’m leaning Wizard solely due to higher activity levels and because of Illwei’s opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vorros said:

Sart had a bad vote onto Conq (who is likely V

Can you explain this to me a bit better? Why is Conq more likely v, and why was Sart’s vote bad?

I don’t have a real opinion on Conq’s alignment (hence me being okay with his exe but not wanting to vote there) and I village lean Sart’s opener, so I’m curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Luckspren said:

Putting myself in the Forsaken's shoes, the safest thing to do would be vote on someone other than Conq and use Compulsion to move a vote from Conq to wherever I am.

So you think one of myself, Sart, Xino, and Mat is a Forsaken?

My take is that given Illwei's reputation as a dangerous player (and the existence of at least one player familiar with that rep), the elims would have been more happy than usual to vote for her versus some other random villager. I also think that, if we assume the vote manip is due solely to the Forsaken, then Devotary's vote doesn't make as much sense from an elim perspective; it draws attention to her without actually accomplishing anything.

So Conq, Vorros, Luck is my current list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibilities of Vote Discrepancy:

  • Scenario 1: Forsaken on Conq (Possibilities include Araris, Sart, and Xino)
    • Forsaken is either Araris, Sart, or Xino. I believe this is fairly likely, though there could be other shenanigans going on there
  • Scenario 2: Compulsion + Forsaken not on Conq. (Forsaken possibilities include everybody but Wizard, Me, Araris, Sart, and Xino) 
    • 2.1 Elim moves vote on Conq to a Forsaken to protect ally
    • 2.2 Vil moves vote on Conq due to confident read. The vote is transferred to whoever the Forsaken voted for, and the Vil has narrowed down who the Forsaken is. Highly unlikely imo
  • Scenario 3: Amyrlin
    • 3.1 Amyrlin Vote Nullifier + No Forsaken Vote. (Forsaken is either Wizard or myself or DNE)
      • 3.1.1 Elim Amyrlin nullifies vote on Conq to protect fellow elim
      • 3.1.2 Vil Amyrlin nullifies vote due to confident read  
    • 3.2 Amyrlin Nullifier + Compulsion + No Forsaken Vote. (Forsaken is either Wizard or myself or DNE)
      • This makes no sense - only possible if Amyrlin nullified Illwei, Xino, or Sart and then used Compulsion to switch vote on Conq to nullified vote. 
    • 3.3 Amylrin Vote Switch + Forsaken Vote
      • See Scenario 2

Notes:

  • Amyrlin Nullifier and Forsaken vote are mutually exclusive
  • Compulsion/Vote Switch must have occurred if Forsaken isn't Araris, Sart, or Xino
  • No Compulsion (or double Compulsion) occurred if Forsaken is Araris, Sart, or Xino

Let me know if I missed any possibilities. I think in order of probability, Scenario 2 (2.1, specifically) is most probable, then Scenario 1, then Scenario 3. 

Edited by Shining Silhouette
added Does Not Exist possibility for Forsaken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, let me sum up my thoughts on the whole vote manipulation situation. I think it is likely that we have a Forsaken, or at the very least, the elim team is pretending we have one. Looking at the rules, we can see that there are no soothe actions that can't also act as rioting actions. Thus, it seems highly unlikely that someone would change a vote to no vote, instead of changing it to the target of their choice. I see three scenarios:

  • The Forsaken is myself, Araris or Xino. There was no vote redirection. This is possible, but I think it's unlikely. It draws attention onto a small pool of candidates, and helps with our process of elimination. It would also mean that yesterday was most likely a V/V scenario, which would not be something the bad guys want to highlight.
  • There is no Forsaken. The elims removed a vote to make it seem like there was one, confusing our process of elimination. Interesting, but doubtful. This assumes there is an Aes Sedai among the Elims, but no Forsaken. Without the Forsaken guarantee, there would only be a 40% chance of that even working. I'll consider it if a vote fails to vanish on Day 2.
  • The Forsaken used Compulsion. In this scenario, their vote didn't count, but they used someone else's vote as their own. For the sake of argument, let's say they voted on Illwei. The vote would look something like this:
    • Illwei (3): Forsaken, Bystander 1, 2, and 3
    • Conq (3): Bystander 4, Bystander 5, Target
  • Assuming that the Forsaken has enough Spirit and that they didn't roll a 0 on any of their Ratings, they could use Compulsion, with a 100% chance of success, because of their role. Thus the vote count ended up like this.
    • Illwei (4): Forsaken, Bystander 1, 2, and 3, Target
    • Conq (2): Bystander 4 and 5
  • This to me feels like the most likely scenario. We're essentially dealing with an E!Rioter. In addition, they don't have to use Compulsion, so it makes using vote count analysis extremely difficult. For all I know, it could even be Matrim who is screwing up the votes.

In conclusion, while i think it is a good idea to track vote manipulation, it can't be our only evidence for suspicion. As long as the Forsaken has the stats for it, they can really obscure what they're actually planning. Paradoxically, the people most likely not to be the Forsaken are the people who didn't vote, aka Silhouette and Wizard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sart, Great minds think alike! Seems we went through the same process haha

4 minutes ago, Sart said:

Paradoxically, the people most likely not to be the Forsaken are the people who didn't vote, aka Silhouette and Wizard.

Totally planned, I promise :P

Edit 1: I didn't consider the possibility that there isn't a Forsaken. I'll edit my possibility tree

Edit 2: I just realized that the No Forsaken Vote encompasses that possibility anyway

Edited by Shining Silhouette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Can you explain this to me a bit better? Why is Conq more likely v, and why was Sart’s vote bad?

I don’t have a real opinion on Conq’s alignment (hence me being okay with his exe but not wanting to vote there) and I village lean Sart’s opener, so I’m curious.

This was solely piggybacked off of someone’s argument of Sart’s vote being opportunistic and blendy. I ninja’d it as it’s called here. As far as Conq’s alignment is concerned, I didn’t find any of the arguments against him to be convincing and I thought that Conq’s posts reflected a towny indignation to being suspected You can call it caught for the wrong reasons, but I read it as town. 
 

Also I think at this point we pretty much know what all the possibilities are, and I think it would be better to determine which scenario is most likely to be the case. I like Sart’s post because he outlined which scenario he found most likely and which one least likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shining Silhouette said:

@Sart, Great minds think alike! Seems we went through the same process haha

Darn ninjas. Since you're here now, where are your suspicions leaning? I'm still sus on Conq, but that's more gut than anything. I need to go back and read through their posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I was going back to find the post about the Sart suspicion and came across the Conq post Shining made. There is a good argument in there about how Conq’s  elim list was all low posters when he said the elims  would be going for high control. I think I originally wrote it off as being unsure of anything, but I’m interested to see how @Conquestor’s reads or thoughts have changed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sart said:

Darn ninjas. Since you're here now, where are your suspicions leaning? I'm still sus on Conq, but that's more gut than anything. I need to go back and read through their posts.

I keep going back and forth. I think it's possible, especially with Devo's last minute vote after probably everyone submitted actions. I think I'm also somewhat suspicious of him because of his Elim lean list. By the way, @Conquestor, why wasn't Wizard on your Elim lean list? He had a similar post count to me and didn't contribute very much.

I think if Conq is Elim, Wiz is also

Edit: If Conq elim, then teammates may include the people who didn't vote Conq: Matrim, Devo, Vorros or Luckspren. Probably not Xino, Sart, or Araris because the Elims wouldn't target their own.

Edited by Shining Silhouette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Vorros said:

There is a good argument in there about how Conq’s  elim list was all low posters when he said the elims  would be going for high control.

In my back and forth with Conq, he rejected that idea, actually. He basically said that he didn’t consider the implications of his analysis as he was writing it, and he said that he did not especially suspect anyone on the list of 3 that I gave. So my peeve is more that Conq was doing analysis without considering how to help the village with it, which seems like an easy trap for a new/recently returning player to fall into. It could be that or an elim putting up filler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...