Long Game 46: A Land War in Asia

[Elenion]

2 hours ago, Bugsy said:

No, I'm just about certain it was a joke, and that it's almost completely NAI. If it is indicative of alignment at all, though, I'd say it's more indicative of being evil than not. If I have everyone at 50% village read to start, it might move him to 49%, say. Certainly not enough to lynch on with any semblance of comfort 

I'm going to jump in and defend Araris here, because I'd actually put it as a village indication. Something like this has come up in multiple games before: IIRC it's called the Ripple Effect because it was RippleGylf who one game messed up the names of the village and elim teams and everyone thought it was a slip. An elim is more likely to scrutinize their posts for accuracy before posting than a villager is, so it's more likely that a villager would make an RP slip than an elim. Bugsy, because I agree with Rand that you looked very opportunistic there, and because I'm not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment. Araris' post is NAI at worst and slightly village at best.

[Doc12]

I apologize for being absent for so much of the cycle - I have come down hard with sickness, a cocktail of fever, flu, a bad cough and headaches (The irony of the Doc coming down with sickness is not one that has escaped, me, I assure you) (Maybe Mr Doctor could help me out here?) , which had me either in bed rest or in no mood to analyze when I was on. I hope this large post with all my thoughts on the cycle so far will be helpful to the rest of you and sufficient contribution. 

23 hours ago, Mr Doctor said:

What is the etiquette around making other peoples' characters say and do things in your RP? I don't want to try and take over anyone's character, and so I'll be avoiding it, but if someone could let me know what the general feelings are on the matter, that would be great. Personally, I'm fine with people making Hobbert do what they want, but he's sort of designed to be a bit of a punching bag.

-------------------------------------------------------

Private Hobbert sighed in relief as Senfalo fastened his arm to his shoulder. Twine be damned, he would be sure to seek out some of this wondrous adhesive tape. They hadn’t had it last time he’d risen from the grave.

“You have my thanks,” Hobbert said, flexing his left hand. “Would you mind handing me my nose?”

“Where did it go?” Senfalo asked. Hobbert saw him turn a little bit green. People always seemed to do that around him.

“It feww between those fwagstones,” Hobbert said, pointing. He hesitated for a moment. “I mean, it feww between the fwagstones.”

Senfalo gave his ears a quick clean with the point of his cutlass. “So you're heawing this, too?”

“Fwagstones,” Hobbert muttered. “Fwagstones. Maybe the mortician sewed my wips on wong. Wast time, they were on upside-down!"

Hobbert heard Senfalo make a noise of pity, but it might have just been the other pirate fighting down a bit of vomit.

"But you're speaking funny as weww," Hobbert said, kneeling down and scrabbling between the fwagstones—ahem, I mean flagstones—for his nose. He levered it up and slapped it on his face. It stuck there, secured by a pair of metal pins. "Maybe it's the mawwiage. Do you think that wuv is in the air?"

The Private was not a believer in the power of love. He’d had all thoughts of it drilled out of him in the army, and more cycles of death and undeath than he had remaining teeth had left no room in him for compassion. But…if if there was love in the air, and they were all being affected like this, then perhaps he wasn’t quite as dead as he thought.

That was enough to make his heart consider beating. It didn’t, of course, but the thought was there.

Hobbert didn't know how to recognise true love in the air, but perhaps Senfalo, who still had blood and bone marrow and all of those good living-person things, would be able to judge it better.

The general etiquette, as you've deduced, is not to take over another player's character. Most of the time, this happens in the form of ending your RP on a question or an action, waiting for the other player to respond. Of course, if you have a PM with the player and have preplanned the RP, feel free to use the other character. Of course, this also depends on the player you're interacting with. I, for example, am fine with you what you're doing, as long as I don't perceive it being massively out of character, but others may dislike it. Hope this helps!

"I don't see what wuv would have to do wif this annoying wisp", Senfalo muttered. "Wuv...Wuv is a fiction, a lie - pewhaps a twuth long dead. speaking of which, why awen't you?"

Without waiting for a reply, he continued assembling the human puzzle as best as he could, trying his best to ignore what he was actually doing. Maybe the lisp was a curse? But why would they be cursed? 

It was at that moment which Eelz chose to run past, screaming something about wives. 

Senfalo blinked. Ookay. Maybe love did have something to do with it. 

"Wats. I told the Dwead Piwate that i'd really hate to cwash a mawwiage."

---

On to my actual thoughts!

21 hours ago, Elenion said:

OOC: I'm using this RP to bring up a real point: if we get Miracle Max on our side, he can effectively negate the elim kill. But if the elims get him on their side, he could make the elims very hard to lynch, under cover of resurrecting people they trust. Miracle Max has incentive to work with both: the elims can help by providing names of elims who have died, but Max needs to resurrect more villagers than elims. If it comes to threats, both sides have repeatable kills, but that might make Max betray the blackmailer to the other side. If a side can convince Miracle Max to work exclusively for them, and only do the minimum resurrections for the other side, that side has a large advantage.

10 hours ago, Bugsy said:

That's a good point regarding Max. One thing I could see working is Max claiming so we know who he is, then healing one elim and 3 villagers to keep a balance. If either side breaks the truce, he'd probably have a pill or two to save himself, and then would help the other team to get revenge

Regarding Elim distribution, I wouldn't be surprised if there were 6. The original win condition for Miracle Max was to revive 3 Villagers and 1 Elim, but it's been changed to 3 and 2, which means there's likely a larger Elim team - if there weren't, his win condition would simply have been scaled up in difficulty for no reason, which hardly seems like a fair adjustment 

With regards to the Giant, I'd agree. While surviving the lynch would be a pretty good way to prove your role and become cleared, it still wastes a village turn, and in a game where we'll likely have to kill some Elims twice or more times, that doesn't seem like something we can easily afford.

I actually really like Bugsy's idea of balance, keeping up a truce seems to be the best way towards fulfilling his win condition while not explicitly taking a side until its necessary. However, I admit I have a distaste towards dictating the actions of another player - as Mark said, being Miracle Max allows one the unique potential to troll both sides and have fun, and while it would be pragmatic to have him declare himself and follow this plan, it might not be in that player's sense of fun. In any case, I leave it up to Max's sensibilities.

 

9 hours ago, randuir said:

Anyway, to keep things going, do people think it would be a worthwhile use of Wesley's kill to kill the lynch target again to accelerate the rate at which we get information?

I personally think it would be useful if the person that has been lynched could easily go either way and implicate different groups of people, but I'm wondering if other people have an opinion on asking wesley to sue the vigilante kill this way.

I actually think this is a pretty good idea, Rand, especially in the first or final few cycles where we need information really quickly. As long as it doesn't become something predictable, Wesley's kill could significantly increase the rate in which the village gets information. If Wesley is going to do this, its better not to announce it or really, tell anyone that you're doing it. 

4 hours ago, Walin said:

Alright, I think it's time for Miracle Max to claim so that they don't get mislynched. Here are my reasons for why everyone should want Max to survive, including the elims:

1. Prolonging the game means we can have more RP, more intrigue, more writeups...basically, having more fun with the game.

2. This player has to protect both villagers and elims for their win condition, which means that no one finds it a good idea to kill them on purpose. Unless they like to ride the edge of LyLo, or [abbreviation for Nothing but Mislynches]

And if they claim, then we'll know one more person that's not an elim. Of course, there are other reasons to claim...such as getting the (eli)ambassador to give them the names of the night kill, for people to give pills to--and then to betray the elimbassador. Anyone who's not the real Miracle Max probably risks death in doing so, but I dunno how they'd get caught besides the real one claiming (or just anyone else claiming)--resulting in a bunch of IKYK

Walin, I'd be careful about assuming which side neutrals would choose   It depends heavily on the player, and claiming leaves one very susceptible to manipulation. I'd go as far as to advise any person who gets into contact with the real miracle Max not to trust him entirely - that's why neutrals are so interesting, aren't they?

9 hours ago, Roadwalker said:

I'm the Miraculous healer.

I really hope this is isn't true, just because a big part of the intrigue would have been taken way  Still, I suppose this is something worth drawing attention to and remembering.

---

On other matters, the vote count goes thus 

Araris (1): Eternum (Self-stated random vote)

Walin (1): Mark (Another random vote)

Devotary (2): Val, Fifth (Nothing against them personally except a grudge from a past game and having a weird name) 

Bugsy (2): Araris, Elenion (Bugsy's seeming opportunisticness in voting on Araris, and for lack of a better target)

There's just been a lot of random voting this cycle, with only the lynch on Bugsy having any semblance of a reason, speaking of which, 

2 hours ago, Elenion said:

I'm going to jump in and defend Araris here, because I'd actually put it as a village indication. Something like this has come up in multiple games before: IIRC it's called the Ripple Effect because it was RippleGylf who one game messed up the names of the village and elim teams and everyone thought it was a slip. An elim is more likely to scrutinize their posts for accuracy before posting than a villager is, so it's more likely that a villager would make an RP slip than an elim. Bugsy, because I agree with Rand that you looked very opportunistic there, and because I'm not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment. Araris' post is NAI at worst and slightly village at best.

Uhm, Len, aren't you being just a little opportunistic as well? Bugs explicitly said that he felt Araris' post was NAI (which you agreed with), and he would only vote on Araris if there's nothing better to vote on (Of which you are guilty of saying exactly the same) 

---

Right now, I have my eye on Walin, Roadwalker, Araris and Len - Mind, I'm not saying I have an elim read on any of them - there has been little opportunity for that, but just players who I am going to keep an eye on. My reasons are thus,

Walin for trying to get Max to claim right now, which while not too alignment indicative, still seems like an attempt to get to Max as quickly as possible. Roadwalker for claiming Max , which is enough to make him the center of attention, and if it is false, is an attempt to create fun at best, an opportunity to sow chaos at worst. Araris for his willingness to vote on Bugsy for no reason other than Bugsy expressing suspicion on him (To be fair, far less reason has been given for most of the votes today, but I'm cautious of how willing he is to lynch Bugs, while the others seemed votes just for fun) And lastly, Len, for being opportunistic  

I would much rather vote later this cycle, but I doubt I'll be able to be up to posting later this evening. As it is, I'm not willing to lynch Len just yet, as he has brought up some genuinely good points for dicussion. Devotary's accusers have nothing against Devotary, Bugsy is being voted on for extremely slim reasons, and the others are more or less votes for fun. Right now, the only thing I have decided to hang on to is Araris' willingness to lynch Bugs just because, which certainly might just be his playstyle, but an unsustainable way to play as a villager. Voting on Araris would also create a tie between him, Devotary and Bugs, which should at the very least provide an interesting situation and allow potential for analysis.  Therefore, Araris. Nothing personal..

[Bort]

Hi guys. Sorry I've not been active yet, but it's been a long weekend without much sleep, and I'm too tired to think about this. I'm planning on getting a decent night's sleep tonight, and will take a look then.

Until then, since I should probably vote for someone, Walin, since he's at the top of the list.

[DeTess]

I'd been working on some analysis, but it can mostly be summarized as 'the things Doc said'.

In all seriousness though, I dislike the way Elenion made the vote against Bugsy about as much as I dislike the hedgy way Bugsy was throwing shade at Araris, but it feels almost too careless to come from an elim. I can see an elim voting on village!Bugsy after I expressed some reasonable suspicion of them, but to do it in a way that basically echoes what made me suspicious of Bugsy in the first place... I'll be keeping an eye on Elenion at any rate. (which is just a long way of saying that this seems twtbaw, maybe).

And Bort ninja'd me. @Bort, you do realize that this means Walin is tied first now? That seems a bit much for a random vote, unless you've got actual reasons to suspect Walin.

 (more thoughts will probably be edited in later)

Edited June 3, 2018 by randuir

[Sparkrunner]

1 minute ago, randuir said:

And Bort ninja'd me. @Bort, you do realize that this means Walin is tied first now? That seems a bit much for a random vote, unless you've got actual reasons to suspect Walin.

Like testing the iocane system? (Not defending bort)

[DeTess]

2 minutes ago, Roadwalker said:

Like testing the iocane system? (Not defending bort)

Speaking of which...*runs of to his GM PM*

Edit:

There's some other things that stood out to me as well. @Kidpen(and there's some others for who this goes as well), you've made a number of posts, but unless I missed it its mostly RP. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make figuring out your alignment any easier. I think only about half or so of the players have posted game thoughts, which makes it harder to find the elims.

Edited June 3, 2018 by randuir

[Bugsy]

8 hours ago, Elenion said:

Bugsy, because I agree with Rand that you looked very opportunistic there, and because I'm not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment. Araris' post is NAI at worst and slightly village at best

Were I attempting to be opportunistic, wouldn't it make much more sense to vote back on him because he had voted on me and simply wait to retract until he did so as well? I could simply have flown beneath the radar. As an elim, I certainly wouldn't be calling attention to something that minor this early in the game, especially because the elims have no incentive to direct the vote this early; it's very unlikely we'll hit an elim day one, so they can just stay back and later vote on targets of opportunity after skating beneath the radar. 

Speaking of, isn't this sort of what you're doing? I said Araris' post was NAI, but slighly Elim at worst. You say this is opportunistic, although I fail to see it at all as advantageous. Then, as you accuse me of being opportunistic, you do the very same thing, saying you're voting for me because you're "not seeing much better stuff to vote off of at the moment". You're acting in a far more opportunistic manner than I am, voting on someone who's already leading in votes for an infraction you admit is minor and for something you yourself have done. I did not even vote in mine, leading to absolutely no influence on the lynch, much less on someone eliminators would deem an acceptable target because I'm already subject to suspicion

Elenion, you currently appear to be the best choice for a lynch to me.

EditL Just realized I wasn't leading in votes, but as this tied me for the lead I believe the point stands. Here's an updated votecount, far as I can figure it:

Walin (1): Mark IV

Devotary of Spontaneity (2): Val, Fifth

Bugsy (2): Araris, Elenion

Araris (1): Eternum

Elenion (1): Bugsy

Edited June 3, 2018 by Bugsy

[Mr Doctor]

4 hours ago, Doc12 said:

The general etiquette, as you've deduced, is not to take over another player's character. Most of the time, this happens in the form of ending your RP on a question or an action, waiting for the other player to respond. Of course, if you have a PM with the player and have preplanned the RP, feel free to use the other character. Of course, this also depends on the player you're interacting with. I, for example, am fine with you what you're doing, as long as I don't perceive it being massively out of character, but others may dislike it. Hope this helps!

"I don't see what wuv would have to do wif this annoying wisp", Senfalo muttered. "Wuv...Wuv is a fiction, a lie - pewhaps a twuth long dead. speaking of which, why awen't you?"

Without waiting for a reply, he continued assembling the human puzzle as best as he could, trying his best to ignore what he was actually doing. Maybe the lisp was a curse? But why would they be cursed? 

It was at that moment which Eelz chose to run past, screaming something about wives. 

Senfalo blinked. Ookay. Maybe love did have something to do with it. 

"Wats. I told the Dwead Piwate that i'd really hate to cwash a mawwiage."

Thanks for the tips! I'm happy to RP with anyone who asks. A zombie pirate will be a great addition to any character interaction!

--------------------------------------------------------------

“Twue wuv has power,” Private Hobbert said. “That’s what evweyone is saying. Wook at the Captain! He was dead, and Miwacwe Max bwought him back!”

He snatched the handful of fingers out of Senfalo’s hand and stuck them haphazardly onto his stumps, then gave them an experimental wiggle. Half of them bent the wrong way and one of them was actually a rather disgruntled mouse, but Hobbert had worn worse attire in his many days.

“As for mysewf, I was meant to be wessuwected on the Eighth Day of the Eighth Year of the Eighth Decade since my wast wising fwom the gwave. But the bwoody witual didn’t go wight! Now I’m onwy Mostwy Wessuected! And it’s the Ninth Day! I swear, I’m weaving a one-star weview on those usewess necwomancers as soon as we sort out this mess.”

The Dead Pwivate—ahem, the Dead Private, sorry—Hobbert pulled himself to his feet and took off after the King Eelz. “Come on, Senfawo, and you too, Fade or whatever you are! Stopping a mawwiage is what we’we here faw! Stopping the Pwince’s mawwiage, so that the Captain’s can happen instead!”

As his uneven footsteps flopped down the hallway, Hobbert called back, “And maybe we can fix this damnation wisp!”

--------------------------------------------------------------

It's currently 3am for me, but I'll be up in time for the end of Day One. Until then, I'll leave my thoughts and my vote here.

I don’t like the way that Araris and Elenion jumped on Bugsy in the way that they did. Bugsy made an innocent statement that didn't seem at all suspicious from a technical standpoint, and justified it well with a follow-up post, but they haven't yet rescinded their votes. That may change, but it currently smells unpleasant to me. Araris was willing to vote against Bugsy for virtually no justification, based on a statement was entirely reasonable on Bugsy’s part, and Elenion followed him.

As Doc, my fellow medical practitioner, pointed out: that’s unsustainable. I can think of two potential conclusions from this. Firstly, they are happy to sow distrust where none needs to exist in the name of getting the ball rolling. Secondly, and perhaps worse, they’re coordinating. Either option is not nice in my books. If they will happily sacrifice the integrity and net trust of the Village, then I’m not sure if they should be considered reliable, regardless of roles. If they’re coordinating, then we have a bigger problem.

However, Elenion has offered helpful posts earlier, and appears to be well-engaged in this game. Since the vote against Bugsy only a small part of his activity so far, and the bulk of it has been discussion on the game mechanics, I’m more willing to trust him to try and move things along with a vote. Regardless, this has earned him a place on a list.

Araris was the instigator of this attack on Bugsy, and he doesn’t nearly have the saving graces that Elenion does. I can’t say that I have any idea about Araris's alignment, but as I stated earlier, either conclusion from this is not good, which means that voting on him is my best option.

I hope that everyone’s names can be cleared and we can resolve it before this turns into something worse.

[Bugsy]

4 minutes ago, Mr Doctor said:

However, Elenion has offered helpful posts earlier, and appears to be well-engaged in this game. Since the vote against Bugsy only a small part of his activity so far, and the bulk of it has been discussion on the game mechanics, I’m more willing to trust him to try and move things along with a vote.

@Elenion, what do you think of this argument? I'm still suspicious of you, but this raises a good point. At the same time, I'd argue the same could be held true for me, and I'm hesitant to withdraw my vote when you're engaging in what I feel is suspicious behavior.

6 minutes ago, Mr Doctor said:

I don’t like the way that Araris and Elenion jumped on Bugsy in the way that they did. Bugsy made an innocent statement that didn't seem at all suspicious from a technical standpoint, and justified it well with a follow-up post, but they haven't yet rescinded their votes.

Not only that, Araris did rescind his poke vote after my initial post in response, and placed it back soon thereafter. That seems a bit suspicious to me; he rescinded his vote to make it look as if he weren't sticking to his guns on a poke vote, and then placed it back once I became an acceptable target of suspicion. I'm curious as to why. @Araris Valerian, care to provide an explanation? 

Updated vote count:

Walin (1): Mark IV

Devotary of Spontaneity (2): Val, Fifth

Bugsy (2): Araris, Elenion

Araris (2): Eternum, Mr Doctor

Elenion (1): Bugsy

[DeTess]

@Bugsy, you stated that you don't think elims will vote early to attract attention to themselves. Both Araris' and Elenion's votes attracted quite a bit of attention, especially at this stage. If one or both of them are elims, do you think there's a reason for them to be moving more agressively?

[Bugsy]

6 minutes ago, randuir said:

@Bugsy, you stated that you don't think elims will vote early to attract attention to themselves. Both Araris' and Elenion's votes attracted quite a bit of attention, especially at this stage. If one or both of them are elims, do you think there's a reason for them to be moving more agressively?

I stated that Elims have little to no incentive in selecting the target of the vote themselves, as is done by anyone introducing a new suspicion on another player, but as suspicion had already been cast on me they could more easily add on without appearing to be the originators of the idea. It's sort of the concept of diffusion of responsibility; I don't believe Elims avoid voting - in fact, as I said, I feel the ideal elim response to Araris' poke vote would have been to return a vote and then mutually back off - but I do believe that they will avoid being the first to identify someone as suspicious, at least this early in the game.

I believe Elenion's vote has attracted attention primarily because it was a bit hypocritical; under normal circumstances, an Elim following up a village suspicion with a vote simply gives the appearance of consensus, which is a powerful factor. Araris', meanwhile, avoided making any firm statement of suspicion, which means he can very easily back off if it goes south. He merely said that someone had to be lynched first, which means if I'm lynched and revealed to be a villager he can just shrug. Either of those actions allow Elims to more easily divest responsibility

[Elenion]

7 minutes ago, Bugsy said:

@Elenion, what do you think of this argument? I'm still suspicious of you, but this raises a good point. At the same time, I'd argue the same could be held true for me, and I'm hesitant to withdraw my vote when you're engaging in what I feel is suspicious behavior

I'm generally of the opinion that lynching very-actives D1 is not as good as lynching less-actives, ceteris paribus, but actives should be lynched if they are more suspicious.

And as for why I thought it was opportunistic, but that my vote was not, you expressed it very well here:

34 minutes ago, Bugsy said:

Were I attempting to be opportunistic, wouldn't it make much more sense to vote back on him because he had voted on me and simply wait to retract until he did so as well? I could simply have flown beneath the radar. As an elim, I certainly wouldn't be calling attention to something that minor this early in the game, especially because the elims have no incentive to direct the vote this early; it's very unlikely we'll hit an elim day one, so they can just stay back and later vote on targets of opportunity after skating beneath the radar.

This is exactly what you did: you got on, saw that Araris had said something questionable, and called attention to it. As you said, elims have no incentive to vote this early. You did not put a vote down on Araris, but you provided yourself with a way to vote on him later. Your statement made him into a "target of opportunity" that an elim!Bugsy could vote on.

My vote differs from yours for two reasons. I didn't do the opportunistic set-up for a later vote; I put my vote down right away. I also didn't think you had good reason to vote on Araris, but I had reason to vote on you because you were taking something that Araris did that I was reading village on, and then spun it in a way that made him look guilty. That looks elim-y, so I voted on you, with that vote also moving the lynch away from Devotary (who is being voted on for no in-game reason).

[Araris Valerian]

I didn't really have time to explain my vote on Bugsy, since I made it right before I went to bed, but his post about me seemed to be hedging unnecessarily. A 1% change in alignment read isn't helping anyone out, so why even mention it?

Also, @Mr Doctor, it's Day 1. We kinda have to be willing to vote for someone with minimal justification. When I said "someone must lead", I was referring to voting on somebody with the intent to kill them, rather than a poke vote (or Bugsy leading us as the first lynchee).

[Elenion]

6 hours ago, Doc12 said:

It was at that moment which Eelz chose to run past, screaming something about wives. 

Senfalo blinked. Ookay. Maybe love did have something to do with it. 

"Wats. I told the Dwead Piwate that i'd really hate to cwash a mawwiage."

41 minutes ago, Mr Doctor said:

The Dead Pwivate—ahem, the Dead Private, sorry—Hobbert pulled himself to his feet and took off after the King Eelz. “Come on, Senfawo, and you too, Fade or whatever you are! Stopping a mawwiage is what we’we here faw! Stopping the Pwince’s mawwiage, so that the Captain’s can happen instead!”

As his uneven footsteps flopped down the hallway, Hobbert called back, “And maybe we can fix this damnation wisp!”

Eelz looked back over his shoulder to see if he was being followed. What he saw surprised him: it appeared that he had lost the priest, but Hobbert and Senfalo were tailing him.

They wust think that I'm doing somewing imwortant! But aww I'm doing is puwwing some diswance beween me and the pwiest with the wife!

Eelz stopped. "Hewwo fewwows! Having fun stowming the castle! I think I'm wost. Whewe is the wedding that we awe supposed to be cwashing again.?"

Maybe this could get him an excuse to join their group, safety in numbers and all that.

[Bugsy]

 

24 minutes ago, Elenion said:

This is exactly what you did: you got on, saw that Araris had said something questionable, and called attention to it.

....okay? I'm not sure what you're going for.

5 minutes ago, Elenion said:

As you said, elims have no incentive to vote this early.

...in the post you quote I literally said "Wouldn't it make much more sense to vote back on him because he had voted on me and simply wait to retract until he did so as well?"

I don't know where you're getting your thoughts that I said the Elims have no incentive to vote. I said they have no incentive to direct the vote. I elaborated on that here:

Quote

I stated that Elims have little to no incentive in selecting the target of the vote themselves, as is done by anyone introducing a new suspicion on another player, but as suspicion had already been cast on me they could more easily add on without appearing to be the originators of the idea. It's sort of the concept of diffusion of responsibility; I don't believe Elims avoid voting - in fact, as I said, I feel the ideal elim response to Araris' poke vote would have been to return a vote and then mutually back off - but I do believe that they will avoid being the first to identify someone as suspicious, at least this early in the game.

What I did with Araris goes directly against this.

22 minutes ago, Elenion said:

You did not put a vote down on Araris, but you provided yourself with a way to vote on him later. Your statement made him into a "target of opportunity" that an elim!Bugsy could vote on.

Had I done that, I would have been both the originator of the suspicion and the first voter, in 2 separate posts. There's no way that would be beneficial, at all. Targets of opportunity become targets of opportunity because they have an appearance of consensus behind them. What you propose would just make me appear to be tunneling. 

30 minutes ago, Elenion said:

I didn't do the opportunistic set-up for a later vote; I put my vote down right away.

I'd disagree that the "set up" was in any way opportunistic. What actual advantage did it convey? It's not as if it set me up to vote later; I could have voted later anyways, and this just would have drawn twice the attention to it - once in my original post, and again in my post with the actual vote. Also, I'd note that my entire point is that Elims don't want to provide the "opportunistic set-up". They wait for someone else to provide the basis for a vote and follow up on someone else's suspicion, divorcing themselves from the responsibility and creating a false sense of consensus. I did exact opposite.

34 minutes ago, Elenion said:

I also didn't think you had good reason to vote on Araris

I fully admitted it wasn't a good reason, hence why I didn't vote.

If I hadn't included the comment and then "literally nothing else" happened this cycle, as I said in the original post, then there would be nothing stopping me from following through without the advance warning. If something did happen, then I wouldn't have voted on him at all and would have avoided the extra attention. There is no feasible reason for me to do this as an eliminator. As an eliminator, it can only be a burden. As a villager, however, that let me demonstrate my attentions to the village, which doesn't help me individually but would arguably help us as a whole. The village begins with an information disadvantage. Sharing our thought processes can only help, where with eliminators it's a far more risky proposition. That is why I included the statement, not because it provided me any semblance of advantage.

[DeTess]

3 minutes ago, Bugsy said:

I'd disagree that the "set up" was in any way opportunistic. What actual advantage did it convey? It's not as if it set me up to vote later; I could have voted later anyways, and this just would have drawn twice the attention to it - once in my original post, and again in my post with the actual vote. Also, I'd note that my entire point is that Elims don't want to provide the "opportunistic set-up". They wait for someone else to provide the basis for a vote and follow up on someone else's suspicion, divorcing themselves from the responsibility and creating a false sense of consensus. I did exact opposite.

The advantage that it would convey is that it gives you a progression to your vote on Araris. Araris is taking a bit of heat because he suddenly voted you without explanation, while if he'd had a prior suspicion stated, he could easily point back to that when making the vote as an explanation. So it's definitely in the elims interest to seem to be working towards a vote, rather than just jump on the nearest available bandwagon.

[Fifth Scholar]

Well. Since the thread is now mostly a heated exchange between Bugsy and Araris/Elenion, I feel I should chip in my two cents. 

I think Bugsy is being misunderstood here- he’s not actually attributing real suspicion to Araris for his comment, merely pointing something out, and the subsequent attack on him for pointing out something to Araris as a clarification is slightly disconcerting. I particularly don’t like the way Len jumped on him after his comments, and his suspicion of Bugsy reads as more opportunistic than Bugsy’s “suspicion” of Araris. I also fall closer to Bugsy’s view on Elim behavior- they generally want to take a backseat and cut ties to their fellow teammates, not push mislynches on villagers that they in turn may be killed for. 

I’m still having an issue reading the thread in full, particularly with the w’s layered over it, but I’ll place a serious vote soon.  

[DeTess]

2 minutes ago, Fifth Scholar said:

Well. Since the thread is now mostly a heated exchange between Bugsy and Araris/Elenion, I feel I should chip in my two cents. 

I think Bugsy is being misunderstood here- he’s not actually attributing real suspicion to Araris for his comment, merely pointing something out, and the subsequent attack on him for pointing out something to Araris as a clarification is slightly disconcerting. I particularly don’t like the way Len jumped on him after his comments, and his suspicion of Bugsy reads as more opportunistic than Bugsy’s “suspicion” of Araris. I also fall closer to Bugsy’s view on Elim behavior- they generally want to take a backseat and cut ties to their fellow teammates, not push mislynches on villagers that they in turn may be killed for. 

I’m still having an issue reading the thread in full, particularly with the w’s layered over it, but I’ll place a serious vote soon.  

Fifth/Bugsy w/w confirmed!

In all seriousness though, I'm starting to agree with you here. I think it's the lingering tournament mindset that makes me look at everything with a more suspicious eye and expecting a different kind of elim play.

[Bugsy]

11 minutes ago, randuir said:

The advantage that it would convey is that it gives you a progression to your vote on Araris. Araris is taking a bit of heat because he suddenly voted you without explanation, while if he'd had a prior suspicion stated, he could easily point back to that when making the vote as an explanation. So it's definitely in the elims interest to seem to be working towards a vote, rather than just jump on the nearest available bandwagon.

He could also have given the explanation in the post giving the vote, no? I see why providing an explanation helps, but fail to see why doing so well in advance does, I suppose. Like I said, I think the fact that the elim would essentially be voting twice for the same person, drawing more attention, outweighs any benefit you might get. 

[DeTess]

6 minutes ago, Bugsy said:

He could also have given the explanation in the post giving the vote, no? I see why providing an explanation helps, but fail to see why doing so well in advance does, I suppose. Like I said, I think the fact that the elim would essentially be voting twice for the same person, drawing more attention, outweighs any benefit you might get. 

Let's say that a villager got lynched, and you're suspicious of two people who voted on that villager. One of the two provided decent reasons for voting that person when he voted, but hadn't really mentioned the person at all before that. The other had been talking about his suspicions well in advance of that person even becoming a lynch target. Which one would you be more suspicious of?

[Elenion]

23 minutes ago, Fifth Scholar said:

I think Bugsy is being misunderstood here- he’s not actually attributing real suspicion to Araris for his comment, merely pointing something out, and the subsequent attack on him for pointing out something to Araris as a clarification is slightly disconcerting. I particularly don’t like the way Len jumped on him after his comments, and his suspicion of Bugsy reads as more opportunistic than Bugsy’s “suspicion” of Araris. I also fall closer to Bugsy’s view on Elim behavior- they generally want to take a backseat and cut ties to their fellow teammates, not push mislynches on villagers that they in turn may be killed for. 

His post was carefully worded so it didn't look like he was casting suspicion, but as an elim I've used wording like that to justify a future vote. As village I'm one of our more aggressive players, so as elim I duplicate that to be consistent. Elim!Len is the type to go out looking for mislynches, and Bugsy's move is the a set-up for that sort of playstyle. I know it because as an elim I do it. Bugsy's accusation of Araris didn't put him on the vote tally, but by making a NAI or slightly-village move look evil he threw suspicion Araris' way and set himself up for a vote later if an Araris lynch got going, without putting him in a position to take flak if Araris flipped village.

[DeTess]

I'm doing a quick pass of all the players. If your name isn't on there, it means I could 't find anything alignment indicative in your posts, and you should probably post more  

Walin (Bill Ted)

His only game-related post was asking max to claim. I disagree with him saying that it would help to avoid mislynches, as a max claim when that's actually about to happen will work just as well as a claim now. His reasons for why no one would want Max dead sound reasonable, but he then spends a lot of time on the idea of the 'elimbassador' to max.

My opinion on Walin can be summarized as *shrug*. The first half of the post feels genuine, and I don't see how the elims would benefit from an early Max claim unless they intend to try and remove him ASAP (which seems like a waste of a night-kill), but Walin then talks about the benefit to Max of being contacted by the elims, which is odd, to put it mildly.

Araris Valerian (Araris) 

His vote without explanation on Bugsy was definitely odd, but the lack of explanation itself doesn't seem overly suspicious. I can't find out how that little detail would have been tot the benefit of elim!Araris, at least. Responding to a stated mild suspicion with a vote seems a bit over-defensive, but his explanation of wanting to get actual voting started is one I can respect. 

Cadmium Compounder (Indigo Montoya)

The first time I saw his vote on Straw, I thought it looked pretty suspicious, given that he was voting after establishing that straw was either village or or elim. I thought nothing of it after he backed off after being called out on it, but in hindsight it still looks bad.

Eternum (Rob Indie Banks)

His quick vote on Araris seems serious, and I don't like it given that it was his only contribution. 

Elenion (Shree King Eelz)

As I said, I don't like the way he jumped on the Bugsy lynch, but the way in which his post mirrored the suspicion I had laid out of Bugsy (which he referred to, and so must have read) is really throwing me off, as it seems too careless for an elim. "Hey this guy is suspicious because he did A. let me vote on him while also kinda doing A".

Roadwalker (Brutus Kowd)

Max, apparently. I have no reasons to disbelieve him right now.

Doc12 (D. Senfalo)

Nice analysis, most of which I agree with. That's also pretty NAI right now (for Doc, at least), but I wouldn't lynch him anytime soon.

Bugsy (Dread Pirate Cummerbund)

I brought up my point against Bugsy way to soon. It provided some interesting discussion, but in this environment it would have been far more useful to wait and see if Bugsy would actually act on his stated mild suspicion or not. His response was quite defensive, but he voted on Elenion instead of Araris (Which would have put Araris in the lead), which suggests he's interested in solving the game, and not just in staying alive. But then he set things up to maybe make a switch towards voting on Araris. Is it too paranoid to suspect him and Mr. Doctor of setting up that post exchange to make Bugsy look more village? 

Anyway, during my trawl through the thread, I've established that @Snipexe, @Hemalurgic Headshot, @Dalinar Kholin and @Sart haven't posted yet.

Right now I want to hear some more from Cadcom. Their vote on Straw just made no sense at all from a village perspective, while I could see an elim doing what he did either as distancing, or to appear to be working on solving the game.

Edit: I haven't made this quite clear yet, but I'm currently somewhat suspicious of Cadcom, Bugsy, Eternum, Araris and Elenion in roughly that order of more to less suspicious. None of them are particularly solid suspicions right now.

Edited June 3, 2018 by randuir

[Bugsy]

38 minutes ago, randuir said:

Let's say that a villager got lynched, and you're suspicious of two people who voted on that villager. One of the two provided decent reasons for voting that person when he voted, but hadn't really mentioned the person at all before that. The other had been talking about his suspicions well in advance of that person even becoming a lynch target. Which one would you be more suspicious of?

Hmm. I would be less suspicious of the person who discussed their suspicions well in advance, yes, because they knowingly put themselves at risk of suspicion if a mislynch occurred. Thing is, in the specific case of what I said, there's very little basis for my "suspicion". As I said, I was almost certain it was NAI, so I wouldn't think that puny advance justification would in any way provide actionable counterweight to the fact that I'd have called him out twice for virtually no good reason.

23 minutes ago, Elenion said:

His post was carefully worded so it didn't look like he was casting suspicion, but as an elim I've used wording like that to justify a future vote. As village I'm one of our more aggressive players, so as elim I duplicate that to be consistent. Elim!Len is the type to go out looking for mislynches, and Bugsy's move is the a set-up for that sort of playstyle. I know it because as an elim I do it. Bugsy's accusation of Araris didn't put him on the vote tally, but by making a NAI or slightly-village move look evil he threw suspicion Araris' way and set himself up for a vote later if an Araris lynch got going, without putting him in a position to take flak if Araris flipped village.

How was that at all "without putting [myself] in a position to take flak"? Also, as I said, what motive would I as an elim have to cast suspicion C1 when I could just hang back and wait for the village to mislynch without my help? I'm not saying I'd avoid voting, but I'd definitely not call out something like that and draw attention to myself. Also, you say Elim!Len is the type to go out looking for mislynches, and given that I know I'm a villager, that's really not making you less suspicious in my eyes. You saw someone else address a suspicion against me, and saw a vote that was already on me, then you piled on, tying me for the lead. That seems to fit your claimed Elim M.O.; you look for a mislynch and act aggressively, using preexisting justification (in this case one not created by you) to back your vote. 

[Mark IV]

2 hours ago, Araris Valerian said:

I didn't really have time to explain my vote on Bugsy, since I made it right before I went to bed, but his post about me seemed to be hedging unnecessarily. A 1% change in alignment read isn't helping anyone out, so why even mention it?

Also, @Mr Doctor, it's Day 1. We kinda have to be willing to vote for someone with minimal justification. When I said "someone must lead", I was referring to voting on somebody with the intent to kill them, rather than a poke vote (or Bugsy leading us as the first lynchee).

Ummm...

 

[Bugsy]

2 hours ago, Araris Valerian said:

I didn't really have time to explain my vote on Bugsy, since I made it right before I went to bed, but his post about me seemed to be hedging unnecessarily. A 1% change in alignment read isn't helping anyone out, so why even mention it?

You are aware I was asked about what I thought of it, yes? I quoted the asking post in my own, so I'm not sure how you missed it if not. When people ask me questions, I'm going to be honest and thorough. That's why I mentioned it.

This seems more like an accusation of convenience than a legitimately meant one. Why are you voting for me for responding to a question fully? Also, why did you neglect to consider the fact that it was a response to a question in your support for your vote?