Jump to content

Kidpen

Recommended Posts

Well folks, first off, my apologies about my inactivity so far.  I'll (hopefully) be able to be considerably more active now.  Had a few things come up this week.

Anyway, I haven't really read through the D1 or N1 cycle yet.  I kind of did that on purpose to see if I could see anything from a different perspective from what everyone else was at the start of this cycle (I'll go back and read through everything after this).  Early on, I understand the idea that it's definitely not villagey to claim a role that you don't have to start the game like that (well, when it's not a situation where you'd be protecting a strong village role).  How are we so sure that Xino isn't the one lying here though?  There's no way to verify Xino's words at this point since the medallion has since passed on.  So if Lumgol was either mistaken (highly unlikely) or just not wanting to give out information, that still leaves Xino fairly clear.  Normally in a situation like this where someone can come out with "HE'S LYING!", we have the benefit of seeing whether that person was lying after the fact and can follow up with a lynch if need be...not the case here.

Just some quick thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Roadwalker said:

@Lumgol.

Lumgol

I had tin, and I scanned bendalloy to sort out the Cadmium Compounder shenanigans. @FatherTiempo, @shanerockes, or @Furamirionind may have been responsible for delaying the lynch.

If you use tin at night, you see where they pass to. So, we now know who has bendalloy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. So I've been exposed. I did lie about having Aluminum. My reasoning was that if someone in the first 6 players who claimed was also lying, and I didn't claim, then there would be no investigation, but if I claimed (even though I would have to lie), then if there was another liar out there, we would be more motivated to catch them.

It appears that I was indeed the only person who lied, and thus my idea backfired. And now I've lynched the only person who was defending me, and who was a villager at that.

As for my vote now, Xino. If you were an elim, you likely knew that I was village and knew what medallion I had (because of passing it to me), so you would have known that I was a villager lying about my medallion, which is a perfect situation for framing someone (and yes, I am aware that I've inadvertently set myself up to be framed). This would have motivated you more to use tin. Now, if you're just a villager who wanted to investigate who was lying, then there really isn't any reason to vote for you, but it seems like my vote will be worthless anyway as everyone is voting for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lumgol said:

As for my vote now, Xino. If you were an elim, you likely knew that I was village and knew what medallion I had (because of passing it to me), so you would have known that I was a villager lying about my medallion, which is a perfect situation for framing someone (and yes, I am aware that I've inadvertently set myself up to be framed). This would have motivated you more to use tin. Now, if you're just a villager who wanted to investigate who was lying, then there really isn't any reason to vote for you, but it seems like my vote will be worthless anyway as everyone is voting for me.

While it is possible Xino is an elim using this opportunity, we did also ask the tin holder to scan for aluminium so we could figure out who was lying.

This kind of move is unadvisable, to say the least. While I can kind of understand the reasoning, I don't like the tactic. It draws time away from people who are actually concealing something. However, it doesn't seem like an elim move. If you'd have been an elim, you would have known if someone was lying and could have claimed tin. 

For now, I'll hesitantly say Lumgol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lumgol said:

Okay. So I've been exposed. I did lie about having Aluminum. My reasoning was that if someone in the first 6 players who claimed was also lying, and I didn't claim, then there would be no investigation, but if I claimed (even though I would have to lie), then if there was another liar out there, we would be more motivated to catch them.

It appears that I was indeed the only person who lied, and thus my idea backfired. And now I've lynched the only person who was defending me, and who was a villager at that.

This just seems really suspicious...

That being said, I do not know why an Elim would lie about having a medallion, or where it would get them. I think that you made a mistake in claiming Aluminium, but I do not believe that the mistake that you made is indicative of your alignment in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep checking to make sure I have aluminum but I definitely have aluminum. Or at least I did, I'm not sure if you lose your medals in the night.

 

I did not use aluminum, but I had/have it.

Okay yeah I had aluminum but not anymore according to the moderator person.

I am not revealing all of my medals (unless there is a vote for a call out) but I do have electrum.

Edited by FatherTiempo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, FatherTiempo said:

I am not revealing all of my medals (unless there is a vote for a call out) but I do have electrum.

We are not revealing the metals we have this cycle; just the metals we had last cycle. You claimed two medallions last cycle, so you must have had something other than aluminium. Last cycle, I had iron and cadmium.

A possible exception to not claiming our current metals is confirming Roadwalker, who claims that FatherTiempo, shane, and Fura currently have bendalloy. This is probably not a great idea, but shane getting bendalloy two cycles in a row feels odd even though I know the odds aren't that bad.

When I have more time, I'll consider Lum's purposeful false claim. There was no particular reason to believe any of the original six was lying, but the only thing lying gains for an elim is to divert the tin scan away at the cost of quite possibly being lynched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, we are quickly running out of time in this round. Good news is, we've heard from everyone but @Eternum, @Ark1002, and @ElendVenture. Elend, you said you were confused about what was happening. Please feel free to ask any questions and we'll do what we can to help you out. I'm also sure Kidpen won't mind answering specific questions regarding your abilities in your PM with him.

The vote count stands as such:

Lumgol (3) - Xino, Itiah, Roadwalker
Xino (1) - Lumgol

This is still well within vote manipulation abilities to mess with. By the way, did anyone get a gold count?

As I said before, I don't really believe Lumgol is an eliminator based solely on the fact they lied about having an aluminum medallion. Had they claimed in middle of the group, then possibly, but claiming at the end is entirely too risky a move for an eliminator when the max number of medallions had already been claimed.

Unless, as Devotary pointed out, it could have been an effort to keep the tin medallion holders from scanning another metal, like Pewter. But again, that's a very risky move because it would end in almost certain death.

It doesn't help I'm a little frustrated Lumgol then used the 7 aluminum claimants as an excuse for voting (see below). That doesn't seem very village in my mind.

But I keep going back to her vote pattern. When I called her out on her reasoning of a "bandwagon" forming toward me, she immediately switched her vote. From past (and painfully bad) experience, this might be a sign of a new eliminator. I know the first time I was an elim, I panicked with how to vote and switched it around a lot at the first sign of someone calling me out. This seems to be what Lumgol is doing. I also feel she hadn't given a satisfactory answer to why she seemed to be avoiding voting on Fura, especially with this post:

@Lumgol, is there a way you could explain that though were were convinced by the arguments against Fura, it was more logical to vote on someone else?

I apologize, I think I may be falling into my tunneling trap once again. But I also feel there are some questions your lynch may help resolve. So, Lumgol

On to other things. Fifth! I'm so sad I didn't get to continue the RP with you! I'll try to write up a good RP in where I am sad the first person I met died. I hope you enjoy it.

Regarding Fifth's death, he seemed to be most suspicious of Fura. If she is evil, and anyone in the elim team was in last game, they may have recalled how quickly he rooted us out and decided it would be better to stop his arguments sooner rather than later. However, it's possible Fifth may have been killed to keep suspicion in that area. It's a terrible IKYK situation, but still worth watching Fura.

Whoa, wait! As I started rereading this cycle, I feel like we missed this glaring claim:

On 2/23/2019 at 9:31 AM, Roadwalker said:

@Lumgol.

Lumgol

I had tin, and I scanned bendalloy to sort out the Cadmium Compounder shenanigans. @FatherTiempo, @shanerockes, or @Furamirionind may have been responsible for delaying the lynch.

 

On 2/23/2019 at 0:40 AM, Furamirionind said:

Hmm, so the elims created at least 3, probably 4 iron medallions, as I did end up using my iron medallion, and I now have 2 iron medallions, and Fifth had one... :/
(Just to be clear, I am not advocating we all claim our current medallions. I just found it a bit amusing that I used Iron, and now have 2, and wanted to say it. : )  )

I don't know who to vote for at the moment.  I am probably the best lynch target, but I am not ready to die...

Fifth dying isn't surprising as he has provided probably the most useful analysis so far this game.

I think, in honor of Fifth's death, we should all roleclaim what roles we had D1.  We already know the elims placed multiple Alluminum and Iron. I know want to know who they passed to.
Also, whoever had Gold should share their results as well...

(bolded is mine)

Quote

Tin: You know all players who have a specific type of medallion. If done at night, this will inform you after medallions pass. (Day or Night)

@Furamirionind, does this mean you have 3 medallions? Does anyone else have 3?

@shanerockes, I just want to confirm you got Bendalloy both last cycle and this cycle?

From my count of claims so far, we have: (spoilered for length... this post is getting very long...)

Spoiler

 

  • Steel : 0 claimed
  • Iron : 3 claimed (1 destroyed)
  • Pewter : 0 claimed
  • Tin : 2 claimed
  • Zinc : 1 claimed
  • Brass : 1 claimed
  • Copper : 2 claimed
  • Bronze : 1 claimed
  • Electrum : 1 claimed
  • Gold : 0 claimed
  • Bendalloy : 3 claimed
  • Cadmium : 3 claimed
  • Duralumin : 0 claimed
  • Nicrosil : 1 claimed (1 destroyed)
  • Chromium : 0 claimed
  • Aluminum : 6 claimed (1 destroyed)

People who haven't claimed anything: ElendVenture and @Droughtbringer. If my count is off at all, please let me know. I was trying to catch everything, but there's a lot to get through.

 

I was going to RP, but this is already very long. I'll leave it at that.

Edited by Elandera
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now you're suspecting me for finding 3 people worthy of a vote and actually voting for 2 of them? I honestly don't see how that can generate suspicion. If you think it makes me more credible if I end up voting for Fura? Sure. Xino. Furamirionind. It's pointless this round anyway, but next round, I'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elandera said:

Does anyone else have 3?

This is probably not something we want people to claim until D3, in case the elims want to get rid of medallions. What we really want is the results of the gold scan, which appears to show the quantity of each type of medallion. From that, we could determine approximately how likely it is for a player to have received three medallions. As the elims know exactly how many of each medallion there are, the lack of gold results indicates that the original holder(s) of the gold medallion are inactive or evil. If the current holder(s) are neither, we should at least get that information by D3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

As the elims know exactly how many of each medallion there are, the lack of gold results indicates that the original holder(s) of the gold medallion are inactive or evil.

This isn’t nessarily true, as one of every medallion was added randomly as well. You are still correct in that whoever has the gold medallion was likely in active last cycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Lumgol said:

So now you're suspecting me for finding 3 people worthy of a vote and actually voting for 2 of them? I honestly don't see how that can generate suspicion. If you think it makes me more credible if I end up voting for Fura? Sure. Xino. Furamirionind. It's pointless this round anyway, but next round, I'll see.

It's not necessarily who you voted on, but your reasoning expressed at the time and how you voted. You seemed to be wanting to go with a bandwagon, while seeming to actively avoid the biggest bandwagon. That's a safe elim tactic, and commonly used by new elims, since they can never be pulled out of a group who caused a mislynch. You might just not have expected so many late votes on CadCom.

It's also a common thing to avoid a bandwagon and/or contribute to a different wagon if the main candidate is a teammate.

27 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

This is probably not something we want people to claim until D3, in case the elims want to get rid of medallions. What we really want is the results of the gold scan, which appears to show the quantity of each type of medallion. From that, we could determine approximately how likely it is for a player to have received three medallions. As the elims know exactly how many of each medallion there are, the lack of gold results indicates that the original holder(s) of the gold medallion are inactive or evil. If the current holder(s) are neither, we should at least get that information by D3.

Oooh, I didn't think that all the way through. I also remembered after posting that there isn't an actual limit to how many can be held, so it's not implausible. Especially since a few people have claimed no medallions.

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...