Jump to content

Conquestor

Recommended Posts

I love the write up El! So now I am instantly incriminated for momentarily participating in phatt's lynch and for being suspicious. But I'm not the only one in that lynch! Jon, Joe, Ecth, Len, Aman, Arinian, Drought, Mage, and Rand all participated. Of course, there are too many people for them all to be Elims, but maybe that is a start. And it's Night, so actions can be done.

Good night!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Hemalurgic_Headshot, your participation in the lynch is hardly the only reason for suspecting you.

Working through your posts so far this game:

You've agreed with Mage, and said that there's no information, so will wait to place your vote. This is precisely what we lynched Phattemer for doing, which clearly isn't to say that you must be lynched for the same reasons, but is interesting on the basis that you appear a little hypocritical in doing so. When agreeing with Mage, you didn't explain why, or offer thoughts, which came across to me a little like you were trying to hide.

I've previously drawn attention to your next substantive post, in which you commended Joe's picking apart the cycle, and said that it was "interesting" that he considered you suspicious, before placing the vote on Phatt.

When I pointed this out, later, you acknowledged that my points were true, and said you didn't think you should be voted on, and that it was a matter of perspective. I'm afraid this doesn't qualify as a defence, to me. Would you care to actually justify your actions, rather than brushing them to the side?

In the same post, you worry about a lack of clarity in the lynch, about 8 hours before roll-over. Not only is it day one, with clarity in who we should vote for on day one always being non-existent, it also appears to me that you're advocating shutting down discussion here. A lack of clarity would mean multiple contenders, and a greater amount of information generated. 

Prior to this post, you say that you'd predicted you'd be accused because of participating in a bandwagon. You then remove a vote from Phatt "because he hasn't defended himself". To me, it feels like you're changing your opinion because you're under pressure, which makes me wonder whether your opinion was anything other than fabricated anyway.

Your next post is taking pride in being a bandwagoner. I have this marked down as non-indicative, but wanted to call it out anyway. Bandwagoning, as a playstyle, reduces information available, shuts down communication, and celebrating it, to me, is akin to celebrating an inability to think critically or independently.

More importantly, though, your next suspicious post is one in which you ask whether you should vote on Phattemer. Why on earth should your vote not be your own, unless you're worried about your own opinion seeming suspicious?

A post setting out thoughts on the rest of what has been said, and responding to those who answered my questions will follow tomorrow, but it is late, now, and I need to sleep.

Edited by OrlokTsubodai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 That's a little defensive there, HH.

 And...  Orlok just posted calling HH out, with much better arguments than what I have. That saves me some trouble. But for discussion's sake, here's my two cents.

Really, I don't find HH's bandwagoning to be a sign that he's an elim, but his unease just might be one.  He made the same error as most of the rest of us, but expects to be targeted personally for it.  That gives me an indication that he might have something to hide.  He could be an elim.  He could be Ruin or Preservation.  He could be something else altogether.  But something is making him antsy.

 Although, Orlok, I think that on a metagame level, there is a niche for bandwagoning. Bandwagoning early leads to what you said, an information drought, but bandwagoning very late in the Day, after all discussion is over, can be a viable countermeasure against vote manipulation. In this case, however, HH used unhelpful bandwagoning, so the point is moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. I will explain my actions.

So to begin with, I was too excited. I forgot that the pacing of a LG is much slower. I was ready for things to progress, get information, etc. So the game begins, and I read through what had been posted. I saw what Mage had said and thought, "that is reasonable behavior for the beginning of a game, and Mage made some good suggestions." So I said so. I was going to step back and see what the more analytical players had to say. My reason for a short post was simple: that was all I had to say, and I did not think I had to say anything more.

So now Joe analyzes the cycle, and thinks I'm suspicious because my behavior of not contributing to the current discussion was not beneficial and encouraged further inactivity. I found that Joe would think that suspicious interesting. Now, in AG3, I had the habit of sticking onto bandwagons. It was useful in getting a lynch going, and because AG3 was my first game, I thought that strategy acceptable. So, I contributed to the bandwagon. 

I was concerned with the lack of information, but that concern was... ridiculous, because, as Orlok mentioned, D1 always has a lack of information.

And what Orlok said was true. I was admitting that. It wasn't a defense, I had none to give. I thought that, as I just stated, that I found my actions not suspicious at all, but perfectly reasonable, seeing that my analysis would be insignificant to that of others, like Orlok or Aman, thus not exactly necessary, because I would simply agree with them. Other people think that a lack of analysis as suspicious. This is what I meant as "a matter of perception."

Now, when I asked, it was mostly a rhetorical question, and I did not expect an answer. Really, I was worried about seeming suspicious, more than I already had been. But I can't rewrite the past, so my actions are going to stay as they are. Just like any other reasonable person, I don't like to die, so I want to avoid it for as long as possible. I doubt a roleclaim is a reasonable thing to do this early in the game, especially since it is the Night cycle, and it won't effect any vote except for the Elim's kill choice. I was specifically worried about being a prime target because multiple players had expressed that after phatt, that they were most suspicious of me for similar reasons. 

@OrlokTsubodai, I hope that this is an adequate explanation of my previous deeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elbereth, the choose your own adventure was…outstanding.  Well done!

That was quite the bandwagon that ended up forming, so I'm going to go back through by sometime tomorrow and analyze the motives of each person from what I can see.  Those who vote with reasons, and those who hop on the bandwagon only to avoid vote manipulation (though I don't think anyone said they were doing that, nor would it have been particularly necessary) are less suspicious to me than those who hop on early and without stated reasons.  I'll also work up a chart of who I think is leaning Noble or Skaa so far, though it's still early enough it's hard to get much of a read.  I think I'm leaning Noble on Len and Orlok, leaning Skaa on randuir and HH, but fairly neutral on most others. I'll give reasoning as much as I can when I get a chance to type it all up.

EDIT: I also will be watching those that didn't vote, though a D1 vote is always trickier.  We didn't have votes from @Silverblade5, @Straw, @Hemalurgic_Headshot, @Bartimaeus, and @Szeth Son-Son Mallano, even though most of them were posting.  Like I said, not as big of a deal for the D1 vote, but I'll continue to track that, and anyone who consistently doesn't vote will be a viable target for me.

Edited by Jondesu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ecthelion III said:

The countdown is for 48 hours I believe.

Thank you. >> 

50 minutes ago, Darkness Ascendant said:

tsk tsk @Elbereth

I don't need to be told twice. :P 

And thanks to all who liked the CYOA. It was very fun to write. 

blu_1489449600.png

Edited by Elbereth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dougal sat in a comfortable chair in his rooftop garden, smoking a pipe and thinking over the events of the day. It certainly had been more eventful than the last couple of months had been. He grimaced at the memory of Exisa’s execution. Still, the people of the Ministry had become very agitated when that band of zinc had been found on the poor noble’s body, so it hadn’t been a complete tragedy.

Dougal’s thoughts turned to happier times as he reclined on his chair and stared off into the mist beyond the windows of his private garden.

Because if I'm going to die this night, I'd like to do it sitting in a comfy chair. 

There isn't much else I can comment on right now. The loss of a metallurgist was unfortunate, but I suspect that's going to be an issue with most mis-lynches. I'm curious about the reasoning behind some of the suspicions currently being thrown around (Stick of Joe, Jondesu of me). I can understand people wanting to put these suspicions out immediately, just in case they die before putting their reasoning up. Still, I do hope they'll explain their reasoning, because it's a lot easier (if you're innocent) to defend yourself against a reasoned out suspicion than it is to defend yourself against the nebulous ire of a dead and confirmed-good noble.

Edited by randuir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Joe: And then she suggested to that Kandra that they should contact Phattamer. and then that Kandra revealed that they were suspicious of phatt and stick both, and heavily suspects that they are both eliminators, and is planning on lynching stick next cycle, should phatt be an eliminator. (Hi, TrellVin the Kandra here)

All the elimy stuff right there^

Though I'm also suspicious of everyone who participated in the Phatt lynch. More so of the ones who voted on him and then retracted their votes afterwards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, _Stick_ said:

All the elimy stuff right there^

Though I'm also suspicious of everyone who participated in the Phatt lynch. More so of the ones who voted on him and then retracted their votes afterwards

I pretty sure there was only one person who did that. You don't need to be so secretive of your suspicions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Hemalurgic_Headshot, I'm on a lunch break, now, and can't  spare much time, so will address your response in detail when I have the time to do so properly. For now, though, I'd like to emphasise the point that everyone is capable of analysis. We all know that Aman can be terrifying, but who really wants the game to turn into a variant of follow the cop, where we let Aman direct us? Everyone can contribute something useful, and additional perspectives help everyone.

@Amanuensis, you have been online at least twice since rollover, and promised thoughts on Phattemer's lynch, and on Joe. Would you share these with us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OrlokTsubodai said:
 
 

@Amanuensis, you have been online at least twice since rollover, and promised thoughts on Phattemer's lynch, and on Joe. Would you share these with us?

For sure. I'll start heavily analyzing yesterday with what I know now and begin working on compiling all of my thoughts soon. Just need to eat breakfast first. I'm not sure how long it will take me, but even if I have to cut it short, I'll make sure it's all posted before this turn ends, given I've reasoned there's a 25% chance I get killed tonight.

Edited by Amanuensis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, so after reading back over the thread and taking notes, I am adjusting some of my reads.  Here's my summary of my thoughts:

Elenion: Poke voted and started bandwagons, pretty normal behavior. Agreed that inactives have been a major issue in other games. Offered legitimate role advice for every role, wary because he's used that to gain trust in previous games, but also seemed genuine, and no particularly dangerous suggestions. No strong feelings either way, watching for now. (Other players behaviors are making me start to lean more Elim, but that could easily be misinterpretation.)

Silverblade: Poked for crusade with no other reason at all, maybe a little suspicious. Removed poke vote from Mage, said Elenion's advice seemed ok.  Leaning maybe Elim hiding behind minimal discussion.

Stick: Got in before a poke vote, asked who to lynch, but didn't provide any of their own discussion (hates D1, like me). Asked if anyone has PMs from kandra (probably a bad idea in the main thread). Voted on Mage instead of joining bandwagon, because he wasn't certain about lynch (who is on D1?).  Suspicious of HH for joining the bandwagon, but didn't mention suspicions of anyone else who did that. Leaning Elim.

Randuir: Provided some recommendations, only flaw was in idea of stockpiling metals, but with a good purpose I think. RP'd a little, one of the few to do so, but without ignoring discussion. Rightly expressed that phatt could just have had poor logic but not be Elim (proven correct). Seems to be playing different from last game, in which he was an Eliminator, so starting to lean somewhat village, but staying wary after being fooled. 

Orlok: Opposed the methods of the CC, with some good points. Continued to oppose in later posts as well, although seemed to misunderstand some of the ideas.  Provided responses to discussion from most other players. Feels genuine, leaning village.

Mage: Encouraged middle ground on CC, pointed out the problems with just poke voting without reason or encouraging discussion (like I did, which was a mistake on my part).  Continued discussion throughout the day. Feels somewhat village.

HH: Says we have no information, need discussion, but then says he will wait. Later added some discussion about phatt and Len, ending up voting on phatt without much reason other than to add to the bandwagon. Could be covering for not voting on a teammate?  Added some RP in separate posts.  Removed vote because he was criticized for joining the bandwagon, and because phatt hadn't defended himself. Leaning slightly Elim.

Straw: Thinks a strict CC sends a wrong message to new players, which is the opposite of how I feel.  No strong feelings either way though.

Drought: Says he's there. Agreed that lynching inactives is good, as long as we don't focus on them. Mostly lurking.

Arinian: Didn't know who to vote on, suggested that CC and poke votes don't seem to indicate alignment (probably accurate). Suspicious of Stick for...not seeming suspicious? Some RP.  Leaning slightly toward Elim.

Ecth: Announced presence, called out Phatt for waiting to vote, and voted on him. No strong feelings either way.

Aman: Busy and didn't get to post much, which for him means only a couple thousand words. :-P Gave some summaries of feelings on players, leaning town for now.

Joe: Quoted and responded to posts, a good plan, and rated his suspicions of each player. Suggestions offered seem both genuine and beneficial, leaning village for now. Claimed kandra (only person to do so in main thread). Questioned benefits of guessing numbers of Elims, but seemed genuine in doubting that, even though I disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To start this post off, I want to apologize to @phattemer. Unfortunately, I've had to go back and add this second sentence in, because I ended up going onto a bit of a rant, so readers, beware.

I always feel bad when I'm instrumental in the death of a player, especially when I don't have good reasons to be suspicious of them. In your case, I wasn't suspicious of you at all, only annoyed that you were making posts that claimed to advocate discussion while you avoided participating in it. At the time, I felt that instead of allowing focus to remain on the Contribution Crusade - which in my opinion is a tired, old discussion that tends to lead us nowhere, in a similar vein to whether or not the village should lynch on the first day or not - I wanted to address a specific problem that I have, both as a player and a GM, that I feel affects the games most significantly.

In response to one of Mage's posts, I made the following statement: 

Quote
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Interesting. So, you don't agree with the lynch on phatt, because you've had fallible logic in the past. In my opinion, the two scenarios are very different, as your "slip ups" always occurred while you were actively participating in the game, where phatt is being very passive. He's made two posts, no more than a few short sentences, and both involved him advocating discussion without making any effort to contribute. It's less the fallacy and more the principle of the matter that is keeping my vote on him, which is why I said I would remove it if he puts himself out there more.

Emphasis mine.

Considering you were Noble, I can't help but be disappointed. Although it was Day 1, you had plenty you could have responded to. In fact, you even addressed that in your third-to-last post, and yet you neither took the time to respond to even a fraction of it, nor did explain to us why you couldn't. If you turned out to be Skaa, I could have accepted your silence as you trying to avoid giving anything more away with your death, but clearly that's not what happened. If you had provided an excuse for why you weren't able to be very active in that period of time, I would take solace in the fact that you weren't avoiding responding out of carelessness. Because you didn't, now it looks like you just didn't care enough to trouble yourself, which bothers me.

Why do we play Sanderson Elimination? No matter what an individual's answer is, I imagine it boils down to having fun. While some people may have different ideas of fun, I think this forum attracts a certain preference, or perhaps, a few. I won't go making generalizations about people, but I will try to explain my perspective. Me? I'm a long term thinker. My planning is meticulous, not spontaneous. Naturally I look for ways to maximize the length of the fun, not the strength of it. The reason for this is because I have seen many games drag on to a point where it's anything but fun. Either the players are left are too distracted or disinterested in continuing it, or they've gone to accept defeat. I've even been alive in one case, where I was an eliminator, and a village Nyali openly conceded the game, when she still had the chance to turn it around. As a GM, I've had to end my own game several Chapters early due to players not being able to commit to the game, which directly reduces the fun of the players who still wanted to continue participating, while also letting down all of the dead teammates who were at least counting on the survivors to pull a win.

As both a player and a GM, that hurts. And that's something I don't want for this game, or any other. So, with you, Phatt, I saw more of an opportunity to make a statement for the good of Sanderson Elimination as a whole than I did to win this game. Having played with you in the past, I figured that chances are, you were a villager. I've been an eliminator with you once and you weren't necessarily more active, but I've also been a villager with you, or an eliminator against you, and in most cases it's been the same exact scenario. I would be lying if I wasn't biased against you as a result, and it's nothing to do with you as a person, but just because of the dangers it poses to the whole experience of the game.

You're consistently low-active to in-active enough that without seeing evidence of interest, I expect you to not participate for long, or in any meaningful way. And that very thing hurts the game, because by leaving you alive, that gives the eliminators a comfortable buffer to work around. Take LG30, for example. They were still outnumbered by the village two-to-one, but because half of the villagers were no longer participating, it allowed them to pull a mass reveal and end the game early. As great as it was for RP, I still count that as a failure regarding the game.

There were times I wished I could have intervened then, but knew I couldn't, because it would be overstepping my role as the Game Master. But since I'm a player here, I now have the opportunity to make my point.

I find myself asking why you play Sanderson Elimination, and I can't figure out the answer. I've seen many players sign up for games only to bail after the game has started. I understand that real life happens, it's happened to me too, and that's the point of making that sort of thing clear. GMs can adjust balance accordingly, or the players can plan for it in advanced or simply work around it. You did not make a reason clear, nor did you make an effort, and in the end that's why I voted for you.

That being said, I respect the way you handled things yesterday. You accepted there was information that could be learned from your death, and bowed out. I want to thank you for that. That said, I don't regret my vote, nor do I your death, because I wholeheartedly believe in the importance of participation, for the good and fun of everyone. All I want from you and from the other players is a little time and effort. If they can't handle it, then I honestly don't understand why they sign up, as it doesn't benefit themselves and ends up hurting others.

This is where I end my rant.

 

At the end of the previous turn, this was the vote tally:

 

(0) Silverblade5Elenion

(1) Magestar: Silverblade5_Stick_

(0) DroughtbringerJondesu

(10) phattemerElenionEcthelion IIIAmanuensisA Joe in a Bush, randuirHemalurgic_HeadshotArinianElenion, Jondesu, Magestar, phattemer, Droughtbringer,

(1) ElenionOrlokTsubodaiMagestarphattemer

 

That's a twelve players who ended the turn with an active vote, leaving five who did not participate in the lynch. They are as follows: Silverblade5, Straw, Hemalurgic_HeadshotBartimaeus, and Szeth Son-Son Mallano.

 

In the beginning of the game, @Silverblade5 poke voted Magestar, later retracted it, and as far as I recall, never posted again. I can't say for sure if he was active on the forums or not between then and the turn's conclusion, but I would be willing to be that he was. Regardless, previous games have shown me that this is not unusual for him as a villager, and I don't think I've ever seen him as an eliminator. As a result, like Phatt, I have no idea about his alignment, but would gladly vote on him for the exact same reasons I voted on Phatt, with the caveat that I would have no reason to want him dead if he gave the village more to work with.

@Straw, likewise, only ever made one post, which was that a strict Contribution Crusade sends the wrong message to new players. I don't necessarily disagree with that, but he was prodded by another player (Jondesu, off the top of my head) for more on that, and never responded. So, consider my bias against Straw the same I have against Phatt and SB. If he's village, he's hurting us by not helping, and if he's an eliminator, he's doing that on top of plotting our loss.

@Hemalurgic_Headshot has already received attention from players like Orlok. His responses this turn read genuine to me, even if the circumstance with his vote is suspect. I am currently of the opinion that he is village, since I believe that if he was an eliminator, he wouldn't have second guessed himself and retracted his vote. I acknowledge that my instincts on that could be wrong, and I accept the consequences if they are, but I'd be willing to take his side on the matter, barring future developments.

@Bartimaeus posted at the very beginning of the game to confirm that he did not receive a role PM. Since then, he has not posted a thing, while I have caught him viewing the thread quite a few times. Is this evidence of him being evil? Definitely not. This exact same thing happened with a brand new player (Trellagist, I believe) in LG21, and he was lynched very early in the game, if not first. Trellagist turned out to be a villager, and if I'm not mistaken, the eliminators (of which I was one) allowed it to happen to bide time / get them closer to victory. So, Bart. Any chance I can urge you to post, either tonight or this following day turn? If you've read my rant above, you'll see how truly important to me, as well as the game, that you begin participating, even if it's just a little. Give your thoughts on what's happened so far. Ask questions if you're confused. Thoroughly consider things people have said and let us know who you suspect are good and who you think might be evil. It would mean a lot to me if you did, as this is my first time seeing you in a game, and I'm always happy to make new friends / eager to see some fresh blood.

@Szeth Son-Son Mallano, I haven't seen you view the thread once. In fact, I just checked your profile, and you've been offline since Wednesday (nearly been a week). History has proven to me that means you won't be returning. Needless to say, that saddens me, but I will continue hoping you return and that you can begin participating as well.

Of these five players, I don't have enough information on them to truly decide an alignment, besides HH, who I am leaning Noble. SB's second post claimed he had a good gut read on Elenion, but that isn't much to work with. It could be a genuine statement from a villager. It could also be a soft defense if the two are eliminators, although I'd guess that it's more likely SB trying to frame Elenion, if SB is a Skaa.

 

Of the twelve players who did vote, one (Orlok) had voted on Elenion before the bandwagon on Phatt began, while one (Stick) other voted on Mage in the middle of it. As the lynch on Phatt formed, both players could be seen as attempting to distract it. Orlok was trying to encourage players not to bandwagon, while Stick was just uninterested in the lynch on Phatt and decided to vote on Mage for being non-committal. I can see Orlok's part in it both being an eliminator wanting to garner trust once the lynch on Phatt showed he was village, or him being a villager genuinely concerned with the little information we'd gain by dog-piling on him. Because he is among the more active players and I like to think I know him better than some others, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt that it's the latter.

As for Stick, the only comment I really have to make is that I get a sense she expected the results. I'm making a very general post about everyone right now, so if I decide it's worth investigating further, I'll begin dissecting all of her posts to see if I can pick apart the exact reasons why I think it. It's also worth mentioning that I've been an eliminator with her before, and in that game I don't remember her ever participating in the main lynch, choosing instead to vote for players who weren't receiving much attention, and therefore allowing her to skate under the radar. If that trend continues in this game, I would cite that as one of her eliminator tells. Unfortunately just by stating this publicly, she's now aware of it and could turn it on it's head, which is why I usually prefer to keep that information to myself until I can build a solid enough case, but considering that I have no way to protect myself this game, I doubt I'll be able to gather enough evidence. In contrast to all this, enough people have expressed suspicion of her already, which my gut is saying she's not a Skaa. I'll have to look closer at everyone who's expressed suspicion of her before I take a stance either way.

 

That leaves ten players who voted for Phatt. Nine if you subtract Phatt himself, and eight if I take away myself. Ecthelion IIIA Joe in a BushranduirArinianElenionJondesuMagestar, and Droughtbringer. It's a long list, which means there's a lot I could say, so I'm going to try my best to keep this as terse as possible.

I am suspicious of Ecth. The two times I've seen him as an eliminator (LG26 and LG30) he wasn't very... public, for lack of a better term. He's only posted twice (three times if you count this turn's post about the timer, which I don't) which makes me think he's holding thoughts in reserve and that he's busy plotting elsewhere. The few thoughts he has posted were light, but confrontational. He also never responded to my @message asking if he reconsidered his thoughts about Phatt after seeing the bangwagon form, which gives me the feeling he was avoiding it because he didn't want a good situation for the Skaa to turn itself around. Additionally, he picked apart one small portion of one of my many posts to make me look like I was Preservation trying to avoid being targeted by Ruin. As a villager, why point that out? Preservation is confirmed Noble, and all Nobles should want to protect his identity. On the other side of the fence, whether he was right or wrong, it would publicly put the thought in Ruin's head, making me a viable target to be attacked by him. Whether or not I actually am Preservation, the Skaa would benefit from Ruin killing me, as that allows them to place their kill elsewhere. A combination of these factors has put Ecth at the top of my suspicion list.

As for Joe, I've been minorly suspicious of him since his first real post. The big one, where he quoted a bunch of people. It wasn't any big thing, but it was his response to my posts that threw me off. To quote him, he said "My vote on Phatt was ninja'd by 9 hours. +2 for this post, because he's hitting on all the ideas Villagers should be hitting on." The fact that my vote on Phatt was ninja'd by him doesn't mean a lot to me. Whether it's a lie or not, it doesn't really matter. It's the second half where he basically praises what I said. My gut reaction to that comment was that he was buttering me up. Could it have been genuine? Sure. Heck, I hope it is, because if I'm not hitting on all the ideas a Villager should be hitting on, then I'm doing my job wrong, regardless of what my actual alignment is. Thing is, this sounds more to me like he knows my alignment. The only way he could know that would be if he was a Skaa. If that's the case, then there's two ways he could handle me. Kill me ASAP, or try letting me live and get on my good side. It isn't a lot to go on, but the last time I was set against an eliminator Joe, I figured out he was an eliminator for similar reasons, and now that I know Phatt is a villager, that leaves the possibility open that Joe isn't. So yeah, I'd place him on my suspicion list right below Ecth.

Next is Rand. Honestly, he's a tricky one. I watched how he operated as an eliminator in LG30, and he was a pretty convincing "villager." As the game went on, there were a small things I think I would have picked up on, but given I had more information than the players, that might not be true. Looking over his posts this game, there's very few reasons why I could see him being evil. Really it's just the timing of his vote, and the fact that his suspicions almost seem too clean. His first post says he's only suspicious of Stick for asking about Kandra, and that he has a good read on Orlok, Joe and I, and good gut reads on Mage and Len. If Rand is a Skaa, I would think that one of those four players is as well, but likely no more than that. He later goes on to agree that HH's vote on Phatt is odd (as HH admits to bandwagoning), which makes me think that Rand is going for an easy target, given the fact others were expressing suspicion of HH, on top of the fact that I'm belueve HH is Noble. I'm not sure where I'd place him on my suspicion list quite yet, but I'll figure it out by the time I conclude this post.

Already gave my opinion of HH, so that brings me to Arinian. I'd be lying if I didn't say that it was hard for me to get a solid read on him, given that english isn't his first language. But I worked pretty closely with him in QF21, and he doesn't seem too much different than he did then. For now, my gut is telling me village, but really I need more posts from him before I can take a firm stance one way or another. I will note publicly that he was a villager in LG30 and considerably more involved in the discussion, but since this game just began, I can't figure out if he's just holding back or building up.

I talked about Elenion a bit yesterday. I'm fully aware that I was the one who really directed the lynch away from him, but that doesn't mean I don't think there's a chance he is evil. From the start, he's been consistent with his support of the Contribution Crusade, which isn't a bad thing, but as Orlok pointed out, there were some flaws. At the very least he was consistent with his stance throughout the turn and his vote ended up on the person it should, if he was ascribing to his beliefs. That being said, his posts this turn don't sit as well with me. Considering my village gut lean on HH, I get the sense that he's exaggerating the cause of HH's vote retraction and reconsideration, with hopes that HH can end up the next lynch target. Also, his comment about bandwagoning almost feels like a defense of his own vote on Phatt, even if he doesn't word it that way outright. Overall I would place Elenion somewhere in the exact middle of my suspicions list. Where it goes from there will depend a lot on his future participation, and how he responds to the following question. @Elenion, in your last post of the day, you said "And since no other solid targets have appeared, although I admit that I have a couple people I'll be watching carefully." Can you be less vague about this? Exactly who are you watching carefully, and why?

Annnd I just got ninja'd by Jondesu. Great, since he's next on the list of people for me to look at. Of all the players who's posts I've looked at so far, he's got the most, so this paragraph might be a bit longer. Let's see... something to note, he seems to mention inactivity affecting the elims, which is weird because since he's been here, I don't think there's been a game where the eliminators suffered from a bad case of inactivity. Not a reason to accuse him, but if he is a Skaa, it's possible one or more of his fellow Skaa are inactive this game. Oh, good. One of his posts was all RP, and another was a short response to Rand about how I hadn't posted yet. Hm. He accuses Len of giving role advice to gain trust, then goes on to recommend that players follow the advice others had presented already, or to follow their instincts. Seems almost hypocritical, but I don't know if that's alignment indicative yet. I am not a fan of him throwing shade on Len over the role advice, though, but I gave my shpeel on that yesterday already. He ended up voting on Phatt despite him not liking bandwagons, and honestly didn't really explain why. Yes, he said Phatt's contradiction was causing the "back of Remart's neck to prickle" but his vote was the 7th, versus Len who had only 3. So @Jondesu, why did you end up voting on Phatt, there, when there was a 3-vote gap already? Also, your first post this turn said you were leaning Skaa on Rand, but your new post just said you're leaning village, albeit wary. What changed between the two posts? Answer that, and I'll probably be able to put you in a firmer place on my trust/suspicion list.

I'm starting to get fatigued, so I'm going to keep my pieces on Mage and Drought short. Mage's involvement in the earlier discussion of yesterday give me a good read, mostly because of how serious he appeared to be taking the subject. His defense of Phatt in the beginning made me think he might be evil, and either trying to protect a teammate or trying to get good credit if Phatt turned out a Noble. Looking back, I see more that he was, like me, trying to give the guy a chance to explain himself and potentially shift things to a player he was suspicious of. In the end, Phatt proved that he couldn't be bothered, so he changed sides, and for that reason I think he actually is a villager, as otherwise I'd expect him to have just left his vote on Len. That being said, @Magestar, considering the lynch was a basically a done deal after Jondesu's vote, what was your rationale in changing your vote from Len to Phatt? What was running through your head then?

That leaves only Drought, who, looking back, wasn't really active at all. Four posts, all with minimal content. First was just an "I'm here," second was him neither supporting or opposing the Contribution Crusade. Really, he was just neutral about the whole thing, saying "we should still lynch inactives" but "shouldn't focus on just the inactives." He then proceeds to basically be inactive, not posting until the last two hours of the game, immediately after Phatt votes for himself, just to vote on Phatt because he "doesn't enjoy when players vote on themselves." Overall, nothing very alignment indicative, except that it wasn't until things were already set in stone that he got involved, and that he literally voted on Phatt moments after Phatt said "I suggest looking to the 3rd-5th votes." I would think that an eliminator would be less likely to vote on a villager in this circumstance. I would probably do what Drought did if I was evil, if only to spite the statistics. As for Drought, I don't think he'd act the revolutionary, so this was more likely a spontaneus decision. Regardless, I won't let him off the hook, because he hasn't been much more active than Phatt was, or other players like them. So, @DroughtBringer, consider this me formally requesting you to be more involved in the game from this point forward. I know you're capable of it, I've seen you do it. If you're a villager, I hope I can appeal to you by saying we need you. If you're not... well, what's the fun in winning if you just play the role of spectator?

Well, that just about covers my thoughts on everybody. Happy, @OrlokTsubodai? :P 

I'm not sure how useful a color-coded trust list would be, but I still might work on one, just later. This post took me a few hours to write and I would like to take a break.

 

Edited by Amanuensis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Amanuensis said:

That being said, @Magestar, considering the lynch was a basically a done deal after Jondesu's vote, what was your rationale in changing your vote from Len to Phatt? What was running through your head then?

I actually didn't see Jondesu post. :P I believe I said in that very post that I had been ninja'd, and responded to Jondesu in an Edit.  As for what was running through my head, I A; felt the need to back my opinions with actions, and voted on Phatt, who didn't seem like he could be bothered with defending himself, B;  I didn't see a reason to leave my vote on Len, C;  There was no good reason not to put a vote on Phatt.

Aman, your definitions of short and terse never cease to amaze me. :P  I don't think I'd ever like to see one of your 'Long' posts, for fear I would never get through it.  As it is, I don't have time on me to dissect your post, but let it be known I read all the way through it. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Magestar said:
 
 

I actually didn't see Jondesu post. :P I believe I said in that very post that I had been ninja'd, and responded to Jondesu in an Edit.  As for what was running through my head, I A; felt the need to back my opinions with actions, and voted on Phatt, who didn't seem like he could be bothered with defending himself, B;  I didn't see a reason to leave my vote on Len, C;  There was no good reason not to put a vote on Phatt.

Aman, your definitions of short and terse never cease to amaze me. :P  I don't think I'd ever like to see one of your 'Long' posts, for fear I would never get through it.  As it is, I don't have time on me to dissect your post, but let it be known I read all the way through it. :P 

Ah, right. I saw that, but it didn't register, since all the posts said (18 hours ago). I'm assuming those two ninja's were Len and Phatt's votes, then. So when you switched votes, it would have been 5 on Phatt to 3 on Len. That's reasonable if you consider vote manipulations, which you didn't mention, so that kinda makes me more suspicious of you. But I'll trust my instincts on you for now.

And yeah... I'm a bit of a wind bag. I won't deny it. Speaking of, I think it's about time I get back to that final write up for LG30.

Edited by Amanuensis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Amanuensis, thanks for pointing out those two things. It always helps to know what makes people wonder so I can respond.

For the first question, I legitimately didn't like what phat was doing, as I said, and didn't just pile on the bandwagon to add votes. As you said, there would have been no point. The part about Remart's neck was just RP flavor.

For randuir, I discussed this in a PM as well, but my initial suspicion of him was due to feeling like he's playing differently from last game, and it stuck in my head when I made that first post. After I reviewed the D1 posts, though, I realized that he was behaving differently, but in a way that seems helpful, and also remembered that he was Elim in the game I remember him playing differently, so that makes him more likely village this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jondesu said:

Randuir: Provided some recommendations, only flaw was in idea of stockpiling metals, but with a good purpose I think. RP'd a little, one of the few to do so, but without ignoring discussion. Rightly expressed that phatt could just have had poor logic but not be Elim (proven correct). Seems to be playing different from last game, in which he was an Eliminator, so starting to lean somewhat village, but staying wary after being fooled. 

 

1 hour ago, Amanuensis said:

Next is Rand. Honestly, he's a tricky one. I watched how he operated as an eliminator in LG30, and he was a pretty convincing "villager." As the game went on, there were a small things I think I would have picked up on, but given I had more information than the players, that might not be true. Looking over his posts this game, there's very few reasons why I could see him being evil. Really it's just the timing of his vote, and the fact that his suspicions almost seem too clean. His first post says he's only suspicious of Stick for asking about Kandra, and that he has a good read on Orlok, Joe and I, and good gut reads on Mage and Len. If Rand is a Skaa, I would think that one of those four players is as well, but likely no more than that. He later goes on to agree that HH's vote on Phatt is odd (as HH admits to bandwagoning), which makes me think that Rand is going for an easy target, given the fact others were expressing suspicion of HH, on top of the fact that I'm belueve HH is Noble. I'm not sure where I'd place him on my suspicion list quite yet, but I'll figure it out by the time I conclude this post.

*Checks badge book*. I think I need one more endorsement for the "Sneaky Bastard Badge". Anyone?

I'll try to get my own thoughts on the various players up sometime next cycle. I'd have liked to do it this cycle, but I've been quite busy today and there's a game with robot Dinosaurs that requires finishing this evening. If I haven't presented it by the second day of cycle 2, someone poke me and remind me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, randuir said:
 

*Checks badge book*. I think I need one more endorsement for the "Sneaky Bastard Badge". Anyone?

I'll try to get my own thoughts on the various players up sometime next cycle. I'd have liked to do it this cycle, but I've been quite busy today and there's a game with robot Dinosaurs that requires finishing this evening. If I haven't presented it by the second day of cycle 2, someone poke me and remind me.

Assuming you'll survive the night, eh? :ph34r:

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...