Quick Fix Game 23: You don't want to Play this Game.

[DeTess]

Okay, I've done a quick reread of the thread, and there's a couple of things I'd like to comment on.

First, from @Cluny the Scourge

Quote

Yitzi2

He has a suspicious activity level, posting a lot but not contributing TOO much.

I could say the same about you, regarding posting only once to vote, and not adding too much other thoughts. Do yous till think yitzi is suspiucious? And is there anyone else you are suspicious of.

Next, from @Ecthelion III:

Quote

I find it rather suspicious that Orlok, who had already accrued a vote, would stand up for Bridge Boy's--the leading candidate's--suspicious behavior.

This likely isn't going to change anything, but just putting it out there.

This comment confuses me a bit. I don't really see why the amount of votes a villager has should influence his decisions about defending someone. An elim would probably not defend the leading lynch candidate if they themselves are at risk, for obvious reasons. However, a villager would try to steer the conversation to someone they think is actually suspicious if they think the leading candidate is probably innocent. After all, a villager has nothing to gain by a mis-lynch.

Vote tally:

Cluny(1): Drought

Drought(0): Hero

Cloudjumper(1): Hero

Remember that you need 2 votes for the lynch, and the only remaining vote manip power is vote negation.

[Yitzi2]

5 hours ago, A Joe in the Bush said:

 

1 cycle scan. According to the rules, Librarians do not start with a list of Other Librarians.

1 in 16? I easily made a lot more than 16 role distributions. And then I choose the funniest one.

I really would. 

Scenario 1: Were Bridge Boy and Sart Librarians?

Scenario 2: All Roles are present in the game. (Are there variations of some roles? Are there secret roles? No Comment)

Like Belkar, Sabanta doesn't understand Reptilian reproduction, and thus, cannot tell Dinosaur Genders apart.

1 in 16 is because "all Librarians innocent" is equivalent to "all Hushlanders are non-Librarians".  With 4 Hushlanders, and a 1 in 2 chance for each, that's 1 in 16.

[Yitzi2]

10 hours ago, DroughtBringer said:

Also, guys, don't forget to send out a PM, I would suggest to send one out earlier rather than later as sometimes life can get in the way, and you can forget...which is something that would never happen to someone like me...right? 

I had planned to start a PM this morning, after more people had posted, and due to school was not able to sign in and start one. I would suggest starting PMs earlier, while you are thinking about it, compared to later. Don't be like me. I am not a good person to play follow the leader with  

On the other hand, waiting some time (just not to the very end) can be useful in having more info.  (I have not sent out a PM yet today, but probably will in the next few hours).

[Unodus]

"It all started at that foggy evening party. There was me, Deuce, ace detective extraordinaire, one hand in the pocket of my barely whiter-than-white wedding tuxedo, the Devil’s Advocate, and one arm over the shoulder of a lady with legs you could probably ricochet an object as large as a cue ball off of (only hypothetically since she sort of frowned at that sort of thing when inquired). Celica Deuce, the only woman in over my ten years of experience of masticating the boulevards I’ve ever met who could rock a Stacey on a fried frog- whatever that means. I breathed out a cloud of heavy thick smoke, not because I believed in that hushlander mumbo-jumbo about tobacco- but because I’m one-thirty-fourth dragon, and I can’t help clouding up a room when an egg hits the wrong side of the butter. It was because, at this point, I realized I was in a room filled with nerds. Don't get me wrong, some of my best friends are nerds- but from a professional point of view this complicated things greatly, because I hadn't brought my sunglasses so I could pretend to be awake if one of them actually started talking to me. I was actually a little relieved when someone turned up stiffer than a month old newspaper so I had an excuse to get my detective shades. I didn't know Squirrelmort personally, but I did know he was a humbug at the decapitlaires fair- and that made two of us. At the end of the day, I learned one thing. It takes two to tango- but one to mango (and at least three to congo). And if you really really think about it, that's what puts the lemons under the table. I guess that's technically four things, but the way I saw it- things were just about to get a whole lot weirder"

Edited May 12, 2017 by Unodus

[Droughtbringer]

Ah, now that it is cycle 2, I have some plans that we should talk about, as a village, and see how we want to do this. 

So I figure that if we request the info of who made PMs with who last cycle, we should be able to narrow down the list of possible elims by seeing if they made PMs with each other, as an elim would not want to waste a PM making one with another elim, as they could easily just use their doc to communicate. 

I understand if people don't want to use this idea, but I thought I would propose it.

I won't reveal who (if anyone) PMed me yet, but I failed to make one last cycle.

[DeTess]

@A Joe in the Bush, can the elims use both the conversion and faction kill in the same cycle? I assume they can, but I want to make sure.

Edit: I can see why droughtbringer's plan might be a good idea, especially since the conversion has already happened. However, I'd also say the information he proposes we share might not be completely without value to the elims, as it might help them predict the actions of Smedry's, or take out someone who apparently has a lot of contacts.

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir

[Droughtbringer]

4 minutes ago, randuir said:

I can see why droughtbringer's plan might be a good idea, especially since the conversion has already happened. However, I'd also say the information he proposes we share might not be completely without value to the elims, as it might help them predict the actions of Smedry's, or take out someone who apparently has a lot of contacts.

That's the big reason that I wanted to be able to discuss this before just saying "Hey, everyone do this!" 

But also, in counter to that, we could use the tripper to protect people who would appear to have a lot of contacts.

[Stick.]

What I got from the writeup:

1) A conversion took pace 

2) BridgeBoy had proposed to someone who declined. Do the smedrys need to reveal their talents to the person they want to propose to in order to propose? Is the player BB proposed to an elim who didn't want a villager with the ability to look villager around? But they'd get the talent too, then. Why'd they decline? Or had they planned to marry someone else? 

3) The crystin knights found a librarian..? Not sure if this one means anything 

[A Joe in the Bush]

17 minutes ago, randuir said:

@A Joe in the Bush, can the elims use both the conversion and faction kill in the same cycle? I assume they can, but I want to make sure.

Edit: I can see why droughtbringer's plan might be a good idea, especially since the conversion has already happened. However, I'd also say the information he proposes we share might not be completely without value to the elims, as it might help them predict the actions of Smedry's, or take out someone who apparently has a lot of contacts.

Thwy cannot kill and convert the same cycle.

[Yitzi2]

"Nowhere to be found" (about the knights taking out Thomas) sounds more like "because he hadn't posted" to me.  Contribution crusaders, perhaps?

[Herowannabe]

4 hours ago, randuir said:

Vote tally:

Cluny(1): Drought

Drought(0): Hero

Cloudjumper(1): Hero

To be fair, Queensteph is voting for me. We wouldn't want an incomplete vote tally.

 

1 hour ago, DroughtBringer said:

Ah, now that it is cycle 2, I have some plans that we should talk about, as a village, and see how we want to do this. 

So I figure that if we request the info of who made PMs with who last cycle, we should be able to narrow down the list of possible elims by seeing if they made PMs with each other, as an elim would not want to waste a PM making one with another elim, as they could easily just use their doc to communicate. 

I understand if people don't want to use this idea, but I thought I would propose it.

I won't reveal who (if anyone) PMed me yet, but I failed to make one last cycle.

I don't mind sharing that cycle 1 I started a PM with Cloudjumper and this cycle I started one with Queensteph. I decided that this game (at least to start out with) I wanted to reach out to newer players who may not be getting many PM invites. So far neither of them has responded, though Cloudjumper has read my PM and I saw him reading the thread, hence my accusation of lurking on him. 

I'm not going to share who, if anyone, has started PMs with me. That's for them to decide whether or not to reveal. 

Edited May 12, 2017 by Herowannabe
Incomplete quote

[DeTess]

15 minutes ago, Herowannabe said:

To be fair, Queensteph is voting for me. We wouldn't want an incomplete vote tally.

Oops. Updated tally:

Cluny(1): Drought

Drought(0): Hero

Cloudjumper(1): Hero

Herowannabe(1): Queensteph

Ecthelion(1): Randuir

Also, yeah, despite my objections, I do believe that Droughts idea made some sense, and could help us find some useful information. I made PM's with Seonid on C1 and Lopen C2. Incoming PM's are for those who made them to claim, if they want to do that.

Edit: I've diced to vote on Ecthelion for now. His comment that we should just ignore the librarian roles seems to me like something an elim librarian would be more likely to say than a villager. A non-librarian villager would probably be looking for librarians to keep and eye on, and a librarian villager would be looking for a way top turn that role into an asset, instead of telling everyone to just forget about that role.

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir

[Yitzi2]

I started a PM with _stick_ on day 1.

[ImpossibleBowler]

Hmm. Lost a smedry. Could the bold mean that a talent was used to influence  the total count?

[DeTess]

That is what most people are assuming right now. The 'bad at math' talent would allow one to do that.

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir

[Ecthelion III]

As a response to Randuir, 1) I looked at Joe's probabilities, and that was my conclusion based on the data; 2) As was already discussed, in my opinion it's a better manipulation tool for the eliminators than an alignment checking tool for the villagers. I personally believe that anyone who puts too much stock into figuring things out via Libriarianism is instantly suspicious.

My vote is going on Cloudjumper, for 3 reasons. 1) I know I'm a Freeworlder, and for my own sake and the village's I would rather I not die; 2) He has been viewing this thread several times without posting; 3) I would like to get married before I die.

I have to leave now, I'll finish this post as soon as I'm back.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Ecthelion III

[DeTess]

6 minutes ago, Ecthelion III said:

As a response to Randuir, 1) I looked at Joe's probabilities, and that was my conclusion based on the data; 2) As was already discussed, in my opinion it's a better manipulation tool for the eliminators than an alignment checking tool for the villagers. I personally believe that anyone who puts too much stock into figuring things out via Libriarianism is instantly suspicious.

I'm not saying that all librarians are instantly evil (note how I'm not voting on droughtbringer, the only confirmed librarian right now). However, we shouldn't dismiss it as a tool. If someone is already regarded as suspicious, and is then revealed as being a librarian, this could help in making a decision. Likewise, given the increased odds elims have of being a librarian, it would be a good idea to watch those people that are known to be librarians. Of course, we shouldn't lynch someone based purely on being a librarian, but I think it would be a bad idea to simply dismiss the role because there will probably be slightly more village librarians than elim librarians. That would be like saying we should just stop lynching, as there are more village players than elim players.

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir

[Yitzi2]

18 hours ago, DroughtBringer said:

In the second half of last cycle @Cluny the Scourge said something that I don't agree with;

And I don't entirely agree with this logic, At this point in the cylce Yitzi2 has actually done quite a bit, he called out Bridge's weirdness, posted a lot of RP, tried to get people to post (Orlok, namely), 
Whereas Cluny did...one thing. He talked about Yitzi2. When Yitzi2 responded he never responded back. I find that very small amount of contribution more suspicious than anything Yitzi did last cycle, so,  Cluny

This is fairly valid, and I do think a double lynch will help the village this early on (as it reduces the proportion of kills done by the elim kill), so I am voting for Cluny.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Yitzi2

[DeTess]

I disagree that a double-kill would be a good idea. I think we should only do those if we're fairly sure we've got two elims. If we get two mis-lynches it reduces the amount of time before it's game over. It also opens things up for manipulation, so if that bad-at-math smedry is evil, it would allow him/her to pick who we get to lynch.

Also @Yitzi2, could you explain why

18 minutes ago, Yitzi2 said:

and I do think a double lynch will help the village this early on (as it reduces the proportion of kills done by the elim kill)

is a good idea? I don't really get what you're trying to say here.

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir

[Yitzi2]

Just now, randuir said:

I disagree that a double-kill would be a good idea. I think we should only do those if we're fairly sure we've got two elims. If we get two mis-lynches it reduces the amount of time before it's game over. It also opens things up for manipulation, so if that bad at math smedry is evil, it would allow him/her to pick who we get to lynch.

Also @Yitzi2, could you explain why

is a good idea? I don't really get what you're trying to say here.

Let's use an example.

Say there are 100 players with 10 elims, and for simplicity assume no roles.  Just an elim kill and a lynch, but the lynch might target multiple people.  We'll consider 3 cases:

Case 1: There is no lynch (lynch targets 0 people).  In this case, the elims have a clear win, since they've got the only kill.

Case 2: There is a lynch on one person per cycle.  This is the standard game, with a reasonable chance for each side.

Case 3: The lynch targets 99 people, and the village agrees to choose them randomly.  In this case, the village has a 90% chance of winning (as 90 out of 100 potential survivors are village).

So we see that more lynches makes for a better village chance.  Now, of course roles and the knight kill make this more complicated, but the fundamental principle still holds.

[DeTess]

1 minute ago, Yitzi2 said:

Let's use an example.

Say there are 100 players with 10 elims, and for simplicity assume no roles.  Just an elim kill and a lynch, but the lynch might target multiple people.  We'll consider 3 cases:

Case 1: There is no lynch (lynch targets 0 people).  In this case, the elims have a clear win, since they've got the only kill.

Case 2: There is a lynch on one person per cycle.  This is the standard game, with a reasonable chance for each side.

Case 3: The lynch targets 99 people, and the village agrees to choose them randomly.  In this case, the village has a 90% chance of winning (as 90 out of 100 potential survivors are village).

So we see that more lynches makes for a better village chance.  Now, of course roles and the knight kill make this more complicated, but the fundamental principle still holds.

Okay, so I can see how you came to that conclusion. However, since there is a vote manipulation skill, and we don't know if it's in the hands of a villlager or an elim, this actually breaks down. If only 1 of Cluny and cloudjumper is evil, the elims could manipulate this in their favor, as if we'd given them an additional kill. Likewise, if both of them are villagers, this only hurts the village, as it reduces the number of cycles we get for analysis before the elims win by majority. Right now, the only case in which this is guaranteed to work in our favor is if both Cloudjumper and Cluny are evil. I'm not particularly willing to gamble on that.

[BrightnessRadiant]

@Yitzi2 I kinda agree with Randuir...why does a double lynch help us at this stage? We still don't have much info to go off of for our lynch this cycle and getting rid of two people who could both end up being village would be a disaster. Also neither of them have even been that active so if they die we won't really learn much right?

okay so Ninja'd by you but i still don't see that as a very sound strategy. You seem kind of blood thirsty to me  i feel like we should try to get more info on who is really super suspicious before we try for a double lynch right?

i dunno maybe i'm looking at it wrong...but i just feel bad about early lynches cuz it just seems like we get so many villagers killed that way....but in a quick fix i suppose it is really necessary cuz of the short time frame 

and Ninja'd again but this time by Randuir lol

I agree with Randuir's points on this.

[Yitzi2]

31 minutes ago, randuir said:

Okay, so I can see how you came to that conclusion. However, since there is a vote manipulation skill, and we don't know if it's in the hands of a villlager or an elim, this actually breaks down. If only 1 of Cluny and cloudjumper is evil, the elims could manipulate this in their favor, as if we'd given them an additional kill. Likewise, if both of them are villagers, this only hurts the village, as it reduces the number of cycles we get for analysis before the elims win by majority. Right now, the only case in which this is guaranteed to work in our favor is if both Cloudjumper and Cluny are evil. I'm not particularly willing to gamble on that.

The thing is...unless the elims have the Bad At Math character (fairly unlikely), manipulating it would require a vote, and when the other one was then lynched the next day, it would be extremely suspicious.  (I would not advise using a double-lynch if we weren't going to lynch both anyway.)

So the possibility of Bad At Math being an elim does mean it's somewhat dangerous, but overall I'm inclined to think it's an advantage.

[Seonid]

I'm...less than enthused about the idea of the double lynch. There may be a way to game the mechanic in favor of the village. But if there is, I can't see it. Any possible iteration of the possibilities seems to me to be a detriment to the village, with the single exception of if the village successfully lynches 2 eliminators at the same time, which would require the cooperation of both eliminators.

I don't think we could even see a situation where we lynch a villager and an eliminator, due to the elim interference with the lynch - and even if we could, it would only be useful if we couldn't lynch the eliminator any other way.

Put simply. If we lynch 2 players at the same time, the only way it is likely to go through is if both are villagers. And that does not help us at all. I'm not sure if this is an indicator that Yitzi is suspicious, or just that the reasoning is bad.

[DeTess]

7 minutes ago, Yitzi2 said:

The thing is...unless the elims have the Bad At Math character (fairly unlikely), manipulating it would require a vote, and when the other one was then lynched the next day, it would be extremely suspicious.  (I would not advise using a double-lynch if we weren't going to lynch both anyway.)

What makes you think it is fairly unlikely that the elims have the "bad-at-math" smedry? We know they didn't have the other vote-manip smedry, but this is one of the powers I'd think there is a decent chance that it might be given tot he elims.

I'm also not so sure both of them would get lynched anyway. If no new information where to be made available then I would agree. However, there are a number of different source of information that could turn us away from cloudjumper and/or Cluny next cycle, as both the cases against them are relatively flimsy (lurking/in-activeness, and one rather odd post).

Edited May 12, 2017 by randuir