Mid-Range Game 27: Quarantine

[Steeldancer]

Ok, first, Drake you said I lied in my PMs. I... never lied? I said I had multiple strategies, and only shared one in each PMs I actually got out. Meaning, I shared different strategies in different PMs, but only one per. 

Ok, analysis. First, there was no significant analysis of each player day one, so I'm going to skip that for now. 

Votes, nothing significant, besides that Orlok started multiple votes, and changed at the last minute. Not that I'm complaining. I'm just not sure I'm going to find any patterns in the votes, without more data points. 

Finally, the most interesting thing, the "who talked to who" list. Orlok, Alvron and Drake addressed 5 different people directly (I did not include Mac or Joe in this. Most everyone else directly addressed about 2 people, unless they weren't significantly active. 

I was about to post this as an edit to my above post, and then Orlok ninja'd me. Please feel better @Orlok Tsubodai. 

As for the six people thing, I would rather we focus our votes on one person, not 6. 

After looking things over, despite seeing village actions from Orlok, the lack of an item grab... disturbs me. Frankly, I don't trust anything the guy says, after he has conclusively fooled me multiple times before. So the lack of an action makes me suspicious. Orlok. Still hope you feel better, though.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Steeldancer

[Jondesu]

Rest up and I hope they fix whatever is going on, Orlok! Best wishes!

At this point, I’m going to switch my vote to Alvron because I think he’s more likely than Orlok to be Elim. Eternum, Brightness Radiant, and Budgie would be my main focuses for the next lynch as of right now, though of course we’ll have new information by then.

[Alvron]

2 hours ago, Steeldancer said:

Ok, Alvron, stop with the clowns! They freak me out!!! 

Hey now, you're the one that turned my character into a clown.  But I will stop posting clowns except for one final one should I be up for the lynch. 

[Elenion]

Orlok just got hospitalized, and while I still suspect him I don't want to hit a guy while he's down like that. Orlok

I'm moving my vote to Alv. Reasoning:

1. Third on my list of suspicions in the 6

2. Already has votes on him, so voting on him prevents the RNG from coming into play

3. I want his alignment so I can better analyze Orlok

4. He still hasn't claimed an action for last night

[DrakeMarshall]

5 hours ago, Orlok Tsubodai said:

I've been hospitalised, and may not be able to post again before the end of the cycle.

Well storms. Anything I said about you not responding to my PMs, I rescind. You have every reason not to.

5 hours ago, Steeldancer said:

Ok, first, Drake you said I lied in my PMs. I... never lied? I said I had multiple strategies, and only shared one in each PMs I actually got out. Meaning, I shared different strategies in different PMs, but only one per. 

A straightforward reading led me to the conclusion that you were giving each player a different strategy. But, you can have the benefit of the doubt on that one, because it was a fairly minor thing and I primarily paid attention to it because there is so little to go off of on D1.

 

Alvron, if you do not get the tie you wished for, I express sympathy. Your playstyle is always quite fun, even if it might occasionally attract some votes.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Drake Marshall
fixed inconsistent tense

[Elenion]

Vote tally:

Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2

Eternum (0): Jon1

Orlok (1): Len1, Steel1

Monster (1): Alv1

BR (1): Monster1

I'm liking this game state much better than the many-way tie. Assuming no more vote changes (unlikely I know), the Alv lynch should be immune to vote manipulation.

[Caesura]

Ironically, after saying I want to try and be more active on the thread, I can't guarantee I'll make it back online before rollover, depending on how busy work is tomorrow. So I'm putting my vote in now, even though I haven't put as much thought into it as I would have liked. Orlok, I hope you're better soon, but you and Alv both seem hard to trust.

[Steeldancer]

4 hours ago, Elenion said:

Vote tally:

Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2

Eternum (0): Jon1

Orlok (1): Len1, Steel1

Monster (1): Alv1

BR (1): Monster1

I'm liking this game state much better than the many-way tie. Assuming no more vote changes (unlikely I know), the Alv lynch should be immune to vote manipulation.

I had this moment as I was looking at this where I went "are we really bringing the clones over from discord?" Then I realized the purpose of it. 

[Eternum]

Hope you get well soon, Orlok.

Well, I'm sorry for not being active. On second thought, I probably shouldn't have joined a game on this busy a schedule

I'll post (and am posting) on my free time, which is admittedly few and spread out far between, but my opinions on the "6 suspects" (I'm aware I'm one of them :P) vary.

On Alvron I cannot for the life of me get a good grip. You have too much trust in the Gods of Luck and Chance, my friend. I'm not entirely sure I want to lynch you, but so far that's what seems to be happening.

On Orlok I have a pretty solid village read from our PMs together, so I don't want to lynch him.

Monster, Budgie and BR I'm not sure of. Monster I'm leaning slightly village on, because they've been pretty active and helpful, but Budgie and BR have had nothing alignment-indicative as far as I can tell.

I won't vote for a bit longer, because I want to see how the discussion develops, but these are my opinions. I'm not sure who to vote on, so I'll very likely jump onto a bandwagon that I agree with, if one forms. If not, expect my vote to come soon.

[MonsterMetroid]

Well I originally voted for Brightness Radiant because I thought a 5 way tie would be pretty fun. but looking at the votes currently,

Vote tally:

Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2

Eternum (0): Jon1

Orlok (2): Len1, Steel1, Cae1

Monster (1): Alv1

BR (1): Monster1

I don't think that is happening anymore :/. The thing is I don't have a good read on Alv but my gut is telling me he would blend in a little bit more than he is doing now if he was an elim. I'm not sure but that is my gut feeling. I don't really like either one of the two candidates with the most votes being lynched  though admittedly I have NAI readings on the other 3. Though Eternum mentioning he would jump on a bandwagon if one forms makes me a bit wary about him as if I were an elim I would probably say I would join a bandwagon to lessen suspicion if I joined a bandwagon later... crap I'm going into IKYK territory already. Nevertheless It's the most suspicious thing I have seen so far so I will take my vote off of BrightnessRadiant and put it on Eternum

[Eternum]

I think you misunderstood me, @MonsterMetroid. I said I'll join a bandwagon I agree with, not any bandwagon. I've put forward who I'd be more willing to lynch (Alv, Budgie or BR) and I will support those lynches if they happen. A lynch on Alv seems to be happening, for one, and I very much doubt a lynch outside this 6-person group will find any success. This seems too much like trying to twist my own words against me, though, so I'll tentatively vote on Monster.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Eternum
Fixed some formatting

[MonsterMetroid]

1 hour ago, Eternum said:

I think you misunderstood me, @MonsterMetroid. I said I'll join a bandwagon I agree with, not any bandwagon. I've put forward who I'd be more willing to lynch (Alv, Budgie or BR) and I will support those lynches if they happen. A lynch on Alv seems to be happening, for one, and I very much doubt a lynch outside this 6-person group will find any success. This seems too much like trying to twist my own words against me, though, so I'll tentatively vote on Monster.

It's very possible I misunderstood you seeing how I'm missing tone and body language and all.  But "agree with" is a pretty vague term you have to admit. I mean an eliminator who joined a bandwagon could easily say "Oh I agreed with X's arguments about Y's actions" but it wouldn't make it any less true that they were joining a bandwagon and trying to blend in. So as your statement stands it could be basically any bandwagon that you choose to agree with after it forms.

On the other hand if you do have suspicions already, why didn't you voice them in the original post rather than saying you would wait to vote because you weren't sure to vote for?

[Elenion]

Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2

Eternum (1): Jon1, Monster2

Orlok (2): Len1, Steel1, Caesura1

Monster (2): Alv1, Eternum1

BR (0): Monster1

I'm still liking this game state overall, but I'm beginning to grow concerned about the votes on Monster. Both of them are coming from inside the 6, where we know that 2 elims and maybe the thief are lurking, so I think it may be an elim counter-bandwagon. I think it's elim rather than simply self-preservation voting because the target is Monster of all players, who I see as the most trusted of the 6.

@Alvron Since there's no longer any chance of a tie, what are your reasons for keeping your vote on Monster? Self-preservation? If so, why are you on him and not Orlok, who has a higher chance of being lynched?

Edited February 6, 2018 by Elenion
vote tally was wrong

[Eternum]

It is vague, yes. But I thought that who I wanted to lynch (or would agree on lynching) was pretty obvious. That's probably a mistake on my part, though.

And, now, looking at my post, I realize I didn't mention them straight out. I'm sorry about that. But I'm always somewhat indecisive when it comes to this game.. I'm much more comfortable waiting to see how everything plays out, than making a move early-on.

I can understand why you would be suspicious now, though. It's my fault for being obtuse, I guess. Monster.

EDIT: Might want to fix the tally again, Len

I got the notification for your post just as I pressed "Send" XD

Edited February 6, 2018 by Eternum

[Elenion]

Eternum's vote against Monster was originally a retaliation sort of vote, so him pulling it doesn't tip off my elim radar. I'm reading slightly village on him because he doesn't seem to appear to be afraid of garnering suspicion, but it's still a slight read and he's still in 4th out of the 6 in terms of most likely to be an elim.

I'm going to be in a lecture and then in an exam, so I won't be on for a bit.

[BrightnessRadiant]

Blehhhhhhhh turns out I really shouldn't make promises I can't keep...so sorry you guys. With my Uncle coming yesterday and job hunting today I didn't actually get to catch up. 

So so so sorryyyyy

[Alvron]

14 hours ago, Drake Marshall said:

Alvron, if you do not get the tie you wished for, I express sympathy. Your playstyle is always quite fun, even if it might occasionally attract some votes.

Aww, thanks Drakey.  But there is still time for a tie to form.  Although it will just mean I get lynched the next cycle anyway so it really matters not.

4 hours ago, Eternum said:

On Alvron I cannot for the life of me get a good grip. You have too much trust in the Gods of Luck and Chance, my friend. I'm not entirely sure I want to lynch you, but so far that's what seems to be happening.

It is not trust but faith my friend.  The Gods of Luck and Chance have smiled down on me in many a time of crisis.  It is only right that I continue to place my faith in them.   

1 hour ago, Elenion said:

 

@Alvron Since there's no longer any chance of a tie, what are your reasons for keeping your vote on Monster? Self-preservation? If so, why are you on him and not Orlok, who has a higher chance of being lynched?

Self-preservation?  Never heard of it.    I kept my vote there as I have only just gotten on to see four votes on me.  I might be the all powerful and greatly feared Alv, but I do need my beauty sleep.    It's not easy being this evil.

As there is a chance of a tie and I'm all about the ties, Monster, Orlok.  I am sorry Orlok, I know you are sick but this is my best chance of a tie vote and some fun.  You know me, I'm all about the fun.

[Orlok Tsubodai]

I'm still very unwell, so I'm unlikely to see the thread again this cycle. I've been asked in PMs and in thread why I didn't show as taking an item, and at this point don't see why I shouldn't present my case.

This game is broken. It's great fun, and a fascinating concept, but the mechanics favour the village to an incredible degree. This isn't necessarily Sart's fault. He sent the rules to Wilson, Seonid, and myself, and none of us responded, due to varying personal circumstances. We are at least as responsible.

So, you might ask, why is the game broken? Ultimately, it comes down to the revelation of those who take items. This ensures that, each cycle, we only have a small pool of people who can make the kill. In a game of 17 people, as this is, the eliminator team is unlikely to be more than three players. The eliminator team have a limited number of people through which they are able to rotate their kill placement, and as the game goes on, they're going to become more and more exposed. Part of this will be mitigated by people using items they pick up, but many of these are verifiable, and the village should be able to use that information to catch the eliminators with some degree of ease.

As such, I chose not to take an item to provide some degree of smokescreen. Now, you may ask why I'm claiming this, as actually claiming undermines the value in proving a smokescreen. On reflection, I think that my actions alone will not be enough, and suggest that individual villagers choose a turn or two in the game, perhaps by rolling a dice, in which they won't take an item, or an action. Doing this should make it much easier for the eliminators to actually make kills.

You might now be asking why I'm suggesting that the village intentionally handicaps themselves. My answer, ultimately, is fun and sportsmanship.

An eliminator team that are locked down are unlikely to have fun. They'll be under significant amounts of pressure, and won't feel like they have an avenue for victory. I suggest people look at LG4 for a strong example of this. I further contend, though, that the village will have less fun if they don't help work around the rule change. SE games are meant to be a competition, and an easy victory takes away from it actually being a game.

A further question you might ask me is why I've put so much thought into this.

I am the Thief.

I can't win the game, due to mechanics that are yet further broken for the Thief. I need to acquire five bribes over the course of a game unlikely to last more than seven cycles. It's made public if I pick up bribes. Both the village and the eliminators are working against me, and lose if I win, so are incentivised not to pick up bribes. Bribes get destroyed if used on players other than me. My path to victory could only be to steal from five people, who are highly unlikely to pick up bribes, before they actually use them on anyone. In the same way as the eliminator kill, doing so exposes me to scrutiny for not picking up items, but unlike the eliminators, there is only one of me, so the action can't be cycled.

I recognised this upon getting my PM, and decided at that stage to have fun with the game, and then to try to help address balance.

Why am I claiming?

Firstly, to add credibility to my suggestion that we ought to help address the imbalance in the game. I'm the Thief, and can prove that I'm the Thief. I'm not making this suggestion as an eliminator trying to subvert the village, but because I am legitimately worried about balance in the game.

Secondly, because I'm unwell. If I get lynched, it won't matter all that much to me. I've been trying to have fun this game, and claiming is an interesting move. If you let me live (which I'll set out a reason for shortly), I'll carry on just having fun. If not, I'll just convalesce.

Thirdly, to offer to act as a mediator between the two sides. If the eliminators believe they can manage without our aiding them, they can let me know, and I'll relay it. If they believe the game still to be broken, I can communicate that.

Fourthly, to suggest that I take the gun. I'm a neutral party, and I can't win. I have no use for the gun, but instead can act as a safe place for the gun to be kept without either side using it.

In addition to those two reasons for leaving me alive, I intend to continue playing the game as I have been - doing genuine analysis, and stimulating discussion. If you look back at cycle 1, I'd argue that I created a significant amount of the information generating discussion, which benefits the village, and prevents the game turning into a low activity game, with lurking eliminators.

I'd quite like to stay alive to carry this out - I am having fun, and ultimately, it matters little to me whether Alv actually is evil or not. Kind as he has been in PMs, I am in danger of being lynched. Alvron.

[Elenion]

I've been wondering if Orlok was the thief since a player asked me in PM if I had a way to find the thief, but it looks like I won't have to worry about that anymore.

I suggest we let Orlok live. One, because we didn't really earn the right to lynch him: he revealed himself without any analysis calling him out as the thief in specific. Two, I'm really liking his gun plan, because I don't want to lose a herd to the gun nor give it up completely for the elims to take.

I'm not sure if the game will be completely broken, because we have no leads on two of the elims (assuming 4 exist), but right now it does feel a little like shooting fish in a barrel. I'll have to think about letting Orlok overtly aid the elims.

[Eternum]

Well, I didn't expect that. I guess I'll come clean, too. I was Prepared, and started with an item. A Crab. I used it on Orlok, last Cycle, and as such I could see what they did. I saw them use their action to steal. I can confirm that he is, indeed, the Thief.

Yeah, I lied. What did you want me to do?  I don't think there is a reason to keep it a secret any longer, seeing what he did. Plus, this makes the game much more interesting.

[Alvron]

Well, I can't very well hope for a tie with me and Orlok if he's having this kind of fun.  That would go against everything I do.

I was planning on going for the gun to see if I could take some folks out with me but sadly I get Lynched first so I shall instead bow out and wish Orlok a fun time and hope he gets better soon.

And remember,

It's just a game.  Have fun.

[manukos]

i shal not allow fun in my battalion private @Alvron 
plus turns out i cant it the crab i took last turn so i am confisceting your leftover pizza   , i will also need a drink,  so , someone bring me a drink from that bucket over there 

as things stand i am not that sertain about anything if  were around i would had probably violated my no D1 voting rule and have voted for Macwhatshisname , i think that by tomorow we'll get some more clarity ,tho the elims can take turns and they can always claim that they went for an item that is out of stock

On 5/2/2018 at 5:42 PM, Sart said:

A Forgotten cannot take an item and make the kill in the same turn. Likewise, a player cannot use an item and take an item in the same turn. Finally, please note that if a player gets unlucky, and tries to take an item with none left in the supply, it will not be recorded in the write-up

(it actualy surprised me that it hasnt happened already ) for the ones that havent picked an item last day (unles that is what alv was hinting at with him saying that he put in an action)
furthermore i do have to note  that orlok said "This ensures that, each cycle, we only have a small pool of people who can make the kill"
if he is an elim it is easily provable by the true thief ..... thogh the thief wouldnt rly want the village to win before they can gather the bribes so it could just be him claiming that as an elaborate ply but i doubt it 
our dear orlok also made some good points about some functioning problems of the game but aprt from the thief i dont think it is as severe , as i stated above 

if i am still awake when the cycle nears it's end i will vote or if i see better arguments for alvron (but i am not sold as of this moment ) but i dont have someone in particular better to suggest 
 

[Orlok Tsubodai]

So, it looks like Legend has already claimed to be going for the gun. I'm instead stealing from them. Feel free to verify this action, if you so choose.

I stand by my analysis from last cycle, to be clear. I was (clearly), wrong about MacThorstenson, but still do consider Steeldancer with some suspicion.

[Alvron]

2 minutes ago, manukos said:

i shal not allow fun in my battalion private @Alvron 
plus turns out i cant it the crab i took last turn so i am confisceting your leftover pizza   , i will also need a drink,  so , someone bring me a drink from that bucket over there 

Sadly, I ate all the pizza. But I did order you a new one.  The delivery lady was very nice.

[Eternum]

5 minutes ago, Alvron said:

Sadly, I ate all the pizza. But I did order you a new one.  The delivery lady was very nice.

What if my dream is to never have eaten that bite?