Mid-Range Game 4: The Alethi War of Unification

[Lightsworn Panda]

It puzzles me why the Spy Teams decided to kill Ashiok. There were plenty of more dangerous and targeted players around (*Cough* Meta *Cough*). Of all the players, they chose Ashiok, a Darkeye. It would have been understandable if they had killed a Lighteye, since the Spies would have more control of the Secret Vote, but why would they kill a largely harmless target like Ashiok? The Spies couldn't have known he was a Messenger.

 

I can draw three conclusions from this::

 

a) A/Both member/s in the Spy Team that were responsible for the kill had some kind of grudge against Ash.

 

The two Spies in the Spy Team that were responsible for Ash's death were rather wildcard, if not new to this game.

 

c) The Spy Team that were responsible for Ash's death are trolling us.

 

I'm leaning towards the third possibility, since Ash hasn't gained a rivalry or grudge I know of. 

[the winter system]

How is everyone? I'm assuming you are all right, except for Ashiok. So, one question Wilson? Why am I suspicious? If I hear someone thinks I am guilty, I want to know why. Here's some free RP.

 

Odysa stared at the wall. That princess was dead. Odysa had not known her well, Wok was a stranger to her. Why? Odysa was glad it was not her, at least. That was a good thing. What if I am next? She wondered. I will have to raise my alertness. Odysa was already paranoid. In order to survive this, she would have to bring her paranoia to the next level. She stood up, stretching. At least it was not raining. There was still mud in the camp, but her uniform was dry.

Odysa stepped outside, picking up her spear. Maybe she could spar with some other darkeyes. No, it would be too easy to get into a sparring accident. She slipped one of her knife into her bag. Odysa realized she had forgotten her boot knife, then grabbed it. She put in it her left boot. Fearspren creeped around the feet of one of the other people in the plain stone barracks. Odysa smirked at the weakness. She would not let her fear show so visibly, even if she was afraid. Which she was not. People often mistook paranoia or caution for fear.

It was preparation, not terror that drove her.

[Kasimir]

"As far as I can see," said Kaddar, to Nirn, "The way to unravel this riddle is to consider if the spies had believed the King's Wit--whoever he may be--to have been a heterochromic."

 

Nirn cocked his head, waiting.

 

"Think about it," Kaddar continued. "If they believed that the Wit was a heterochromic, then anyone they killed had a 1/18th chance of being Wit." Hulin squawked in protest. "No, I'm not being hasty," Kaddar retorted. "We know the spies have been dispatched in pairs. The only certain information they have then, is that they aren't the Wit. Neither is their partner." He kept at it, sharpening the boot knife with his whetstone. Comforting, he thought, to know that Dalinar hadn't yet decided to kill him. There were whispers he was a spy, which he wasn't even bothering to deny. Obviously, Kaddar thought, I am a spy. He spied on some of the other Brightlords in Dalinar's camp, he was a student of riddles, and many, many other things. "Which basically means that the reason to kill a darkeyes would be because really, they're a far more diverse lot than we are. The only really useful person you could really end up killing among the bunch of us would be a surgeon." He smiled faintly. "After all, I'm sure we both agree that my fellow Brightlords and Brightladies are hardly paragons of human usefulness."

 

Squawk.

 

"Indeed, that is the case. So. But what if our spies had decided that the Wit was one of us? One of the generally useless burdens on Alethkar? Well, then. Far better to kill a darkeyes than a lighteyes and court losing their task for the shame of having killed the Wit. Not having a role in camp would make their task much harder, wouldn't you say, Nirn?" The chicken fluttered off his perch on the chair, and cawed.

 

"Well, then," Kaddar said, and set to devising a riddle.

[the winter system]

!

[little wilson]

Why do I suspect you two? I'll start with Macen, since he asked first. And he's technically the higher of you two (meaning he's my highest suspect, currently). Most of my suspicion of him stems entirely from his last post last cycle. First was the "sitting back a bit" comment, which I can understand, since he's been gone for quite a few months. Playstyles of the players he was familiar with could've changed (assuming those players are even still playing), plus there are a lot of new players. So okay. That's fair. The fact that he was calling attention to his sitting back was like he wanted us to not worry about his silence. Let him slide under the radar. I don't like it when people try to do that. That's an eliminator strategy.

 

Then he mentioned Meta's idea. Meta's idea had issues, and those were brought up very well by Aonar. They were also refuted very well by Meta. The plan, as he laid it out in his second explanation, is solid. It limits the spies very well. And while Macen agreed with the plan, he said "I feel as if we may be limiting ourselves, but it's better than giving the Spies a chance to swing the vote." How are we limiting ourselves? The lighteyes vote is one vote. While it could be of use to Team Good, there's also a larger number of voters at our disposal, since there are more good people than evil. If we work together, that lighteyes vote is unnecessary. But it can work well for Team Evil. One vote can swing something from a lynch to a tie. Or a tie to a lynch. Or, coupled well with a role like the Squad Leader, it could completely change the lynch target. We're not limiting ourselves by carefully directing the lighteyes vote. And yet that's what Macen said, while agreeing to the plan. This is also an eliminator tactic.

 

As for Odysa. At a time when pretty much everyone was placing poke votes on people just to get them to talk, she placed a second vote on Jasnah, ostensibly claiming that it was a poke vote. But that's exactly what mine was. This pushed what was meant to be a poke into a lynch. Then when she made her list, she brought up the fact that there were two votes on Jasnah and said she would normally say it's suspicious, but since she's one of the votes, it's not. That comment almost felt like a subtle manipulation to get people looking at that vote and suspecting me more heavily because of it. And while people should suspect me (they should suspect everyone though), that vote isn't a reason to suspect the person jumping around placing poke votes and then retracting them right after the person responds. It's a reason to suspect the person who was the second voter. Lastly, she tried to throw suspicion onto Jain (using gambler's fallacy), in white text as if she wasn't really trying to get us to suspect him, but she still wanted people to (especially since it was obvious there was white text there, with all the blank space at the end of that post).

 

Those are the reasons. There's not much. Nothing spectacular. Nothing really condemning--that's why I'm not voting. I don't have a good enough reason to. But hopefully, through watching, I'll see something more (whether in one of your three or someone else. I don't really mind. I'm keeping my suspicions open and swayable. ).

[the winter system]

Okay, just wondering. I am subtle. I like subtle. Subtle is fun. SEE IF YOU CAN GET THAT SUBTLE MEANING?

 

...Well, there was no SUBTLE meaning. BUT I AM SUBTLE.

 

EDIT: !!!! COLOR !!!!

Edited December 2, 2014 by Winter Cloud

[Kasimir]

King: If a Lighteyes elects to skip a week's battle, is it directly reflected in the write-up? Or does it only show if they were slated for death? And because you might remember a certain incident from LG5: if a Lighteyes has been protected, and then skips a battle/skirmish they would die in, what is reflected in the write-up?

Edited December 2, 2014 by Kasimir

[little wilson]

.....I just got trolled by all three of my suspects. I'm not sure what to make of that.... :/

[Macen]

Wilson, I actually understand your reasoning and agree with you on why I'm suspicious. Hopefully I can help alleviate some of it with explinatios on why I said certain things.

When I last played, a popular thing to do was monitor players online times. The reason I stated I was sitting back was because I have been on nearly non stop for the last day (with the exception of date night last night, and sleeping), and wasn't posting anything. I didn't want people to take that as me "lurking" so i just stated that I was trying to get back in the swing of it. I get where you're coming from though in that being suspicious, I honestly just didn't consider it being taken that way.

As far as my comment on meta's plan - you're right. There aren't many (if any) flaws in it. I just don't like using my role as a "non-role". The first two games I was in, I was 100% vanilla and it was boring (still fun, but boring). So, my statement didn't really have anything to do with his plan, just me being stubborn. :/

Hopefully that explains some of my reasoning. Thank you for voicing those though - helps me get my mind back into being extra cautious of how I word things.

[Kasimir]

.....I just got trolled by all three of my suspects. I'm not sure what to make of that.... :/

Sorry, guv, I swear we ent collab'ratin'! Wir sind Wut, hör unseren Brüllen zu!

Well. I did try to give you a fair response, and please be somewhat charitable because it's absurdly late for me >> I'm sure with more sleep, I'd have been less inclined to troll  I guess if I were to say a bit more, it was just to block a criticism I made of Joe in MR3 (yes, I know I was an Eliminator then)--that excluding yourself from the suspect pool in a process of reasoning you use to convince others of something can be a pretty sneaky way of trying to get people to rule you out as a suspect or just not really think of you as being as suspicious as 'those people we're considering'. My argument back then was, well sure, Joe, you could do so because you have privileged access to evidence that we don't--but because of that, you can't appeal to this privileged set of evidence in the process of your argument. It just doesn't work that way. So I was trying to be consistent and fair by noting that well, obviously I wouldn't include myself in the scenario I was sketching out, but I did so anyway because you guys don't have access to my evidence, so it can't be a public ground of reason. That's all.

...I'm just finishing a page of my thesis proposal and I'll try to be a bit more useful by the end of my Thursday exam :/

[little wilson]

Ah. Thank you for those explanations, Macen. You're not completely off that suspect list, but you've dropped below Kas. (Also, just a comment about your joke to Kas about being higher on my list earlier. You don't want to be on my list. And I don't mean suspect list. I mean over-arching lists. Some people here have kill lists--people who they want to kill should they ever be an eliminator. I don't have a kill list (except for people like Barty who play me very handily). I have a Battle of Wits list. Right now, the only people on it are Meta, Gamma, and Aonar (although I know Wyrm really wants to be on it too). Gamma and Aonar should've dropped off after LG9, but they were kind enough to state that they weren't fully paying attention to the game. So now I get to try manipulating them again in the (hopefully) near future. I hear that I'm very good on Team Evil, so believe me when I say that you don't want to be on my list. It's not pretty. )
 
 

Does anyone have any suggestions of what I should do, or should I just wait continue to lie low and wait for a balderdash to fall in my lap?

 
 
If you have more time now, I'd suggest reading through the last cycle a little more thoroughly. If you want, skip the RP, and just read the blue text. That'll give you a lot better idea of what's going on. I mean, you can continue to lie low if you want, but it won't really help us much. Active participants are better than semi-actives who don't really know what's going on so can't weigh in on anything (but even those are better than inactives). I wouldn't worry about the fact that the last times you've been really active you've been manipulated by the eliminators. That's the way we learn. I've had that happen too. I think everyone does at some point. And that's fine. It's what makes the game so much fun. At least, that's a factor for me: seeing if I've learned enough to not get taken in by the eliminators.
 
EDIT so as not to double post:
 

Well. I did try to give you a fair response, and please be somewhat charitable because it's absurdly late for me >> I'm sure with more sleep, I'd have been less inclined to troll  I guess if I were to say a bit more, it was just to block a criticism I made of Joe in MR3 (yes, I know I was an Eliminator then)--that excluding yourself from the suspect pool in a process of reasoning you use to convince others of something can be a pretty sneaky way of trying to get people to rule you out as a suspect or just not really think of you as being as suspicious as 'those people we're considering'. My argument back then was, well sure, Joe, you could do so because you have privileged access to evidence that we don't--but because of that, you can't appeal to this privileged set of evidence in the process of your argument. It just doesn't work that way. So I was trying to be consistent and fair by noting that well, obviously I wouldn't include myself in the scenario I was sketching out, but I did so anyway because you guys don't have access to my evidence, so it can't be a public ground of reason. That's all.

 
Ah. Makes sense. Yeah, those scenarios can be tricky. I always still group myself in it when I make them, because I know others suspect me, but I can see why people don't. Or why people might comment on their lack of guilt if they're still going to include themselves in the scenario....... Hm. Apparently I find people suspicious when they don't do something the way I would do if I were in their position. I should probably stop doing that. (although, at the same time, this is what discussion is for....to clear up those misconceptions)

[the winter system]

Trolling is too fun.   

By the way, can you not check this thread for around...I dunno, 9 minutes. That should be enough for me to significantly convince everyone to troll you deliver you freshly baked goods.

 

Edit: COLOR *hits face against the wall*

Edited December 2, 2014 by Winter Cloud

[twelfthrootoftwo]

I have three main suspects right now. All three are low to medium suspicion though, so nothing high. Kas, Odysa, and Macen. But I'm not going to vote on any of the three yet. I want to hear chatter first.

I'm curious why you decided to name your suspects, but didn't give any reasoning. I thought it may have been lack of time, but you've posted a fair bit since the writeup. Having stated their names, someone was bound to ask for reasons; why not just give them straight away?

[little wilson]

I'm curious why you decided to name your suspects, but didn't give any reasoning. I thought it may have been lack of time, but you've posted a fair bit since the writeup. Having stated their names, someone was bound to ask for reasons; why not just give them straight away?

 

I contemplated it. I was actually going to do a much longer post initially, where I explained all three and then voted for one of them, but then as I was looking over my notes, I knew I didn't have enough suspicion toward any of them to vote. Plus, I was in the middle of something at work at the time. So I figured I'd end it there, and see what they had to say (and yes, I figured they'd ask for my suspicions, but I wanted to see how they asked, since that can be telling too). I figured I'd get around to responding in a few hours, after I was off work. But then the computer program at work went down for the rest of the day, so...yeah. More free time to respond.

 

To be honest, I'm glad I did it the way I did. Two of them have pretty much dropped off the list (back to the middle ground where almost everyone else is) so there's only one left. Odysa. And she'll stay on there until she gives some sort of explanation other than excitement over the fact that she's subtle....

[Araris Valerian]

I'm going to vote for Jain since nobody else has placed a vote yet and because you implied that the eliminator teams would either need to be new or trolling to take Ash down. However, Ash didn't make any claims that would connect her death to somebody else. Pretty much everyone that proposed a plan or something had a back and forth discussion that would at least give us a start for who to lynch next. Ash, on the other hand, was a fairly safe choice since we really don't have much to work with directly because of her death.

[the winter system]

Actually, I am terrible at subtly. I have no idea how the Role Selector works, I do not even know which one you use. I have no real reasons for anything I do. I am really bad at implications, besides implying I'm guilty, which is counterproductive. Even after four games, I really need to improve on my SE skills. Anyone willing to give me pointers I will be in debt for. Actually, I probably won't deliver, but either way SOS! *facepalm* I'm just going to stop implying things (on purpose, anyway. Accidents do happen) until I get more evidence. I have no idea how you guys pull these theories out of the hat like this. This is my game #4, can anyone tell my why I am not suddenly good at this? Hopefully I will survive a little longer this time. At this point, I've just dug my "guilty" hole deeper, haven't I?

UGH!

 

EDIT: Storming color.
SERRIOUSLY? IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?

Edited December 3, 2014 by Winter Cloud

[Eolhondras]

I am a little confused as to why some poke votes were retracted while others were not. Is it simply that they didn't need to be as the vote would be tied anyway? Or is there something else to it. It just seems odd when others were very vocal about retracting when conditions were met. Just an explanation would be nice.

[the winter system]

The title of the thread misled me to when the cycle ended. I was going to retract my vote, but ran out of time. Storming time, it gets in the way sometimes. I was busy.

[Lightsworn Panda]

I'm going to vote for Jain since nobody else has placed a vote yet and because you implied that the eliminator teams would either need to be new or trolling to take Ash down. However, Ash didn't make any claims that would connect her death to somebody else. Pretty much everyone that proposed a plan or something had a back and forth discussion that would at least give us a start for who to lynch next. Ash, on the other hand, was a fairly safe choice since we really don't have much to work with directly because of her death.

 

Normally, mostly harmless players like Ashiok would be killed off by the Eliminators around Mid-Game (Cycle 3-5). Like I said before, for Ash to be killed off at the start while there were more dangerous players running around is a bit of an oddity to me. he may have been a "safe choice", but Eliminators don't tend to kill "safe targets" at the start.

[little wilson]

Actually, I am terrible at subtly. I have no idea how the Role Selector works, I do not even know which one you use. I have no real reasons for anything I do. I am really bad at implications, besides implying I'm guilty, which is counterproductive. Even after four games, I really need to improve on my SE skills. Anyone willing to give me pointers I will be in debt for. Actually, I probably won't deliver, but either way SOS! *facepalm* I'm just going to stop implying things (on purpose, anyway. Accidents do happen) until I get more evidence. I have no idea how you guys pull these theories out of the hat like this. This is my game #4, can anyone tell my why I am not suddenly good at this? Hopefully I will survive a little longer this time. At this point, I've just dug my "guilty" hole deeper, haven't I?

UGH!

 

EDIT: Storming color.

SERRIOUSLY? IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?

 

Color editor hates everyone, I think. I've been having more issues with it lately than I usually do.

 

As for pointers. There's no correct way to play these games. Everyone has their own style and that's what makes it fun. If we all played the exact same, it would be boring. You're doing fine. You're learning, and that's the important thing. As for digging your hole deeper, not necessarily. If someone asks you to explain your motivation for doing or saying something, as long as you can give an explanation that makes sense (in that people can understand why it makes sense within your playstyle), you should be fine. But beyond that, I'd hesitate to give pointers, since that would turn you into one of us. And then we'd lose the flair of uncertainty you add to the games (and that flair isn't a bad thing, even if it gets you targeted. You survived almost the whole game in Joe's Quick Fix, so that's something. )

 

 

I am a little confused as to why some poke votes were retracted while others were not. Is it simply that they didn't need to be as the vote would be tied anyway? Or is there something else to it. It just seems odd when others were very vocal about retracting when conditions were met. Just an explanation would be nice.

 

That's pretty standard. Could be timezones or real life or any number of other things. Some of the poke votes (like Joe's) were to get people to talk a little more, but the person didn't, so it wasn't removed. Some of them might not have really been poke votes. I'm not too worried about it since there wasn't a lynch.

[Renegade]

I am a little confused as to why some poke votes were retracted while others were not. Is it simply that they didn't need to be as the vote would be tied anyway? Or is there something else to it. It just seems odd when others were very vocal about retracting when conditions were met. Just an explanation would be nice.

 

Yeah, it's mostly because it would just be a tie anyway, I think.  Although, I am getting a bit tired of these poke votes (yes, I made two yesterday, but I'm beginning to change my mind about them), as they are generally not all that useful, especially in a sort of game where inactives will be killed anyway.

 

Let me say this: I’ve noticed that in many of our recent games, we’ve become a bit lackadaisical in our votes.  We need more people to vote!  Sure, posting plans and observations is good and all, but voting is what the whole game is centered around.  The game’s called Sanderson Elimination for a reason!  We need to be more bloodthirsty!  Even if you only have a scintilla of suspicion towards someone, cast a vote towards them; it’s the whole point of the game!  And don't retract your votes too easily, because pressuring another player enough can get them to reveal things they normally would not with a poke vote.

 

And yes, I will be voting soon (hopefully), once I get my notes and evidence together.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Renegade

[the winter system]

How do people already have evidence? *facepalm* I'm going back over and reading old games. Hopefully will help.

[Alvron]

I am really bad at implications, besides implying I'm guilty, which is counterproductive. Even after four games, I really need to improve on my SE skills.

This is my game #4, can anyone tell my why I am not suddenly good at this? 

You are quite good at finding a guilty player.  In all of your prior games you have found a guilty player early and have repeatedly called them out.  It is just your reasoning that you never share that gets you into trouble.

None of us are good at this.  Each game is different and each player changes their style depending on role and faction.

 

We need to be more bloodthirsty! 

Don't let Wilson see that.

 

 

I would like to hear from Aonar.  He tends to post early in cycles when good and tries to hide when evil.

[little wilson]

Don't let Wilson see that.

 

Too late. The damage has been done.

 

 

...Unfortunately, Ren, I cannot act on my bloodthirsty nature quite yet. But it's very close. I just need a little more evidence, and then I'll be in business.

 

(Gosh dang it. I wasn't planning on being bloodthirsty this game! Why'd you have to mention that?!)

[Eolhondras]

WC, Wilson and Ren, thank you for the clarification.

 

Now. Perhaps if people wish to refrain from voting until they have more to go off, we could bring up the target for light eyes vote this cycle? It may be subject to change when people start to vote later, but I think me need to get the discussion started, as Torwel mentioned earlier, the later we leave it, the more likely there will be non-votes and or eliminator shenanigans. 

 

Edit: Colour

Edited December 3, 2014 by Eolhondras