Quick Fix Game 39: Corruption in the Senate 2: Allomantic Boogaloo

[StrikerEZ]

31 minutes ago, Furamirionind said:

The 5% is nominal. 1 out of 20 times this person dies, are they falsely revealed. Therefore, unless we have specific reason to think otherwise, we should assume the lynch results are correct.

In order for a lynch to happen, there has to be two votes on a player. And per Joe’s response to my question, that means that the minimum chance we have of the alignment being revealed incorrectly is 10%. So, like Bard said, we either need basically everyone to vote on whoever we want to lynch (very unlikely) or we need to keep as few people as possible voting on a person. Which means our lynch targets should only get two votes. All of this is only dependent on the corrupt constable being alive, which is why I think it’s a good idea to lynch the Constables first. That way we can actually be sure of the lynch results, no matter how many people vote on the lynchee. 

[Fifth Scholar]

3 minutes ago, StrikerEZ said:

In order for a lynch to happen, there has to be two votes on a player. And per Joe’s response to my question, that means that the minimum chance we have of the alignment being revealed incorrectly is 10%. So, like Bard said, we either need basically everyone to vote on whoever we want to lynch (very unlikely) or we need to keep as few people as possible voting on a person. Which means our lynch targets should only get two votes. All of this is only dependent on the corrupt constable being alive, which is why I think it’s a good idea to lynch the Constables first. That way we can actually be sure of the lynch results, no matter how many people vote on the lynchee. 

This is true, and targeting the Constabulary with our first few lynches is probably a good idea; without the ability to correctly discern alignment, this game will become an absolute headache. However, I believe Constable General Altea (Gaea) to be evil, rather than Joe or Wilson. The idea here is that the hardest decisions require the strongest wills, and ultimately shutting down the black market, while being a hefty price to pay, is a price higher than losing free PMs or having a random Survivor role floating around; therefore, by paying it, we’re more likely to be rewarded. Also thematically I feel like Joe would make Gaea evil, though I’ve no hard evidence to back that up. 

As for Governor, I vote no leader. I’d prefer giving this to someone scanned with a ledger, and the Elims can’t hammer this vote if we don’t let them, so we might as well wait to hand it out. Also, I’d be less willing to trust those putting themselves up for it—at best, it’s a bid for glory, and at worst, they’re seeking control of the lynch in the later game. Three votes is a lot, and giving it to anybody D1 seems reckless and potentially deadly. 

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

7 hours ago, DrakeMarshmallow said:

Right, lets get started.

First of all, am I the only one who found it weird that the elims don’t get a kill? Maybe the last run of this game will elucidate, there’s a chance I’ll get around to reading it, but my guess is that the elims start with a bunch of knives. I’m having a hard time thinking of another way to balance it, although I also suspect Joe could easily have dreamed up something that hasn’t occurred  to me yet.

 

The easiest, and least interesting, way to prevent the elims from killing people with daggers is for everyone to put votes on a single target, such as one of the constables. Killing anyone would then force the elims to give up the dagger, or bribe someone to vote for the kill target. Lynching a bribed dagger wielder gets the weapon confiscated(and away from the elims), even if the elims decided to frame a villager.

30 minutes ago, Fifth Scholar said:

This is true, and targeting the Constabulary with our first few lynches is probably a good idea; without the ability to correctly discern alignment, this game will become an absolute headache. However, I believe [Gaea] to be evil, rather than Joe or Wilson. The idea here is that the hardest decisions require the strongest wills, and ultimately shutting down the black market, while being a hefty price to pay, is a price higher than losing free PMs or having a random Survivor role floating around; therefore, by paying it, we’re more likely to be rewarded. Also thematically I feel like Joe would make Gaea evil, though I’ve no hard evidence to back that up. 

As for Governor, I vote no leader. I’d prefer giving this to someone scanned with a ledger, and the Elims can’t hammer this vote if we don’t let them, so we might as well wait to hand it out. Also, I’d be less willing to trust those putting themselves up for it—at best, it’s a bid for glory, and at worst, they’re seeking control of the lynch in the later game. Three votes is a lot, and giving it to anybody D1 seems reckless and potentially deadly. 

It may be that shutting down the black market is actually to our advantage, depending on how the Corrupt Senators' win condition works. @A Joe in the Bush, is it that the living Corrupt Senators have to outnumber the living 'honest' Senators, is it based on opposing numbers of living, unarrested Senators, or what? 

If it's just based on survival rather than jail status, then we can win by lynching Gaea and getting all (probably) four daggers confiscated by the constables, either by stabbing people without votes or by lynching dagger wielders. This could be in conjunction with the strategy of using unanimous bandwagons to deny the elims valid kill targets(the elims bribing multiple people is a possibility, but lynching one of them unanimously has a worst case of an elim dagger-wielder without any valid targets.) Of course, this all means that there's a good chance the elims don't actually need to kill anyone and can win by having the living, unarrested elims outnumber the living, unarrested villagers. Even if this strategy did work, we shouldn't force everyone to vote for the same person. Daggers are still more valuable to the elims between the safer passing and lack of alignment reveal, and anyone who votes for a dagger victim is automatically a suspect if there's few enough such voters, but if we're not going for universal dagger confiscation then lynching Gaea goes back to the possibility of corruption rather than a desire to shut down the market. 

For Governor, would you suggest lynching the ledger-user with as few votes as possible, or trusting that a scan of 'not-corrupt' is accurate? It's not impossible the elims would lie and risk two of their players to get the Governor role, although it's risky since we can just lynch the Governor or the supposed scanner, especially if we manage to get rid of the corrupt constable.

[A Joe in the Bush]

32 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

It may be that shutting down the black market is actually to our advantage, depending on how the Corrupt Senators' win condition works. @A Joe in the Bush, is it that the living Corrupt Senators have to outnumber the living 'honest' Senators, is it based on opposing numbers of living, unarrested Senators, or what? 

The Eliminators must outnumber the UnArrested, living, non corrupt, non Survivor players.

[Araris Valerian]

I think we should lynch a Constable as well, and I of course want to lynch Wilson. Seems to me that since everyone likes PMs so much, that’s the constable Joe would make corrupt. Also, this being a QF game, keeping up with PMs on top of the thread seems like a pain. I’ll also vote for Araris to be the governor. Seems like a reasonable enough fellow.

[Shqueeves]

I had about 2 hours of sleep last night, so forgive me for getting everything said above jumbled in my head, but from what I understand, 10 votes is evil, people want to be governor, and Joe is a mad lad. That about sums it up? 

Also, what happens if we have 2 votes on all three constables? No more than 2 can be killed but all people who tie a lynch die. 

[A Joe in the Bush]

9 minutes ago, Shqueeves said:

Also, what happens if we have 2 votes on all three constables? No more than 2 can be killed but all people who tie a lynch die. 

1 Constable chosen at random will survive.

[Elandera]

2 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

In order for a lynch to happen, there has to be two votes on a player. And per Joe’s response to my question, that means that the minimum chance we have of the alignment being revealed incorrectly is 10%. So, like Bard said, we either need basically everyone to vote on whoever we want to lynch (very unlikely) or we need to keep as few people as possible voting on a person. Which means our lynch targets should only get two votes. All of this is only dependent on the corrupt constable being alive, which is why I think it’s a good idea to lynch the Constables first. That way we can actually be sure of the lynch results, no matter how many people vote on the lynchee. 

While I understand the need to keep vote counts either low or high, that also leaves us very open for an elim hammer, especially through vote manipulation. Our best bet would be to focus first on killing the corrupt constable, so we don't have to worry about alignment being revealed truthfully.

As for which constable to lynch, I've never been one for PMs so my natural inclination would be to lynch the detective. However, something about Araris' statement made me realize that PMs are very useful for the village, since it gives them ways to communicate and scheme against elims without them knowing. I'd rather have PMs open for that purpose. Lynching the constable general right away might not be a bad idea, as a way to keep elims from using that mechanic to return a player of theirs from the jail.

@A Joe in the Bush, if there's no one to release from jail, would no one get the survivor role?

 

[A Joe in the Bush]

5 minutes ago, Elandera said:

@A Joe in the Bush, if there's no one to release from jail, would no one get the survivor role?

If the Constable-General get's lynched, the Governor Role get's a 1 use ability to release any player from jail. This ability does not have to happen the turn the Constable-General is lynched, nor does it have to happen at all.

[DrakeMarshall]

9 hours ago, Burnt Spaghetti said:

Yeah i don't want to be govenor and ill hiss at anyone that nominates me, just throwing that out there!

Tempting. If I wasn't voting for me, I would probably want to elect you 

8 hours ago, Young Bard said:

I... uhhh... I don't think I'd do a great job at being Governor, if I'm being honest. That said, my friend Mr Mannequin here seems to disagree.

"Hey everybody! I'm here to tell y'all you oughta be votin' for this here Senator Ventrilis for guvnor - there ain't a finer Senator around, I'm tellin' ya. With him in place, you're sure to have them there Corrupt Senators quaking in their boots, you will. The fine Senator over there (Drake) asked him if he'd be willin' to be doin' what needs to be done, and I can tell you with confidence that he can - let's string up them blasted corrupt Senators, and the sooner the better! Now, this here Corrupt Constable what poisoned the old guvnor is worrying - it ain't gonna be easy, with the fear whatever news we hear is just the words of one of them lies pouring into our ears, but I ain't see no way round that without stringing up the lot of 'em, and we need one alive, at least, because otherwise we'd need to do some proper work ourselves - I mean, we'd lose a valuable asset to the community. Speaking of valuable assets, I hear that Ventrilis here is running for guvnor, and he'd do a mighty fine job at it, let me tell you. He's the finest there is, I say, bold as brass - not a Soother, but has the skills of one if you leave him in a room with someone for long enough. The only decent candidate, I say."

Young Bard.

Yes, I quite agree that we must keep at least one constable alive. God forbid that us nobles ever have to do any honest work for ourselves 

Although, you didn't entirely answer my question. I wasn't asking if lynching in general is a good idea, because I'm pretty sure it is. I'm asking if you think we should have a D1 lynch, considering that the cost to not having one this cycle is considerably less than usual.

5 hours ago, Snipexe said:

I do think voting for yourself is a bit of a power grab

Oh, it absolutely is. It's a 100% shameless power grab 

For what it's worth though, a villager who really wants the role really has no other recourse but to nominate themselves. If I had a more tasteful method of offering myself up as governor, I would gladly do that instead, but only evils have that luxury.

5 hours ago, Furamirionind said:

Hi, I'm here. Wont be active until later tonight, as im at my theater right now. 

I like that Drake makes a good arguement as to why he should be elected. Though this makes me nervous that he is an elim...

Granted, it's probably unlikely, as you dont need to be governor to flip a vote. There is likely going to be a very specific elim voting strategy this game, which could help with that.

The 5% is nominal. 1 out of 20 times this person dies, are they falsely revealed. Therefore, unless we have specific reason to think otherwise, we should assume the lynch results are correct.

I think people with daggers should claim. That will give us an idea of how many are out there, and info on who can kill people. That will help narrow down any kills made tonight.

What theater production? 

I quite agree that this Drake person makes a solid argument  I also quite agree that being paranoid about Drake is a good life decision (although, for the record, if I were evil, I would either be pushing for no governor, or setting up a heated rival candidacy between two different eliminators and laughing evilly as either outcome favors me and nobody suspects they are on the same team ). Full disclosure, if I ever somehow manage to get 50 boxings, I will not hesitate to use them to murder you all, but it isn't very likely.

Daggers claiming is an interesting idea. On one hand, this is a pretty good point, because the meta about power roles not claiming totally does not apply in this game. On the other hand, it isn't clear to me how knowing specifically who has the daggers would be helpful. Is there a reason why dagger holders specifically should claim, and not the holders of other items? Are you hoping to force the eliminators to be accountable for their kills?

I noticed that dagger kills show no alignment flip, which makes them considerably less useful for a villager (even if getting to name a dagger sounds awesome regardless). Villagers should use them carefully, considering they don't give any alignment flip.

4 hours ago, Fifth Scholar said:

This is true, and targeting the Constabulary with our first few lynches is probably a good idea; without the ability to correctly discern alignment, this game will become an absolute headache. However, I believe Constable General Altea (Gaea) to be evil, rather than Joe or Wilson. The idea here is that the hardest decisions require the strongest wills, and ultimately shutting down the black market, while being a hefty price to pay, is a price higher than losing free PMs or having a random Survivor role floating around; therefore, by paying it, we’re more likely to be rewarded. Also thematically I feel like Joe would make Gaea evil, though I’ve no hard evidence to back that up. 

As for Governor, I vote no leader. I’d prefer giving this to someone scanned with a ledger, and the Elims can’t hammer this vote if we don’t let them, so we might as well wait to hand it out. Also, I’d be less willing to trust those putting themselves up for it—at best, it’s a bid for glory, and at worst, they’re seeking control of the lynch in the later game. Three votes is a lot, and giving it to anybody D1 seems reckless and potentially deadly. 

Hm. I could actually get behind a lynch on a constable. Alignment flips are hecking important and it's less vital to lynch a regular player in this game with no per-cycle kill. Gaea.

With regard to the governor vote. To be clear, in my case, it's seeking control of the lynch in the later game (maybe also a bid for glory but that's secondary ). I already said I'm planning to save the power for dire circumstances only; I'm not claiming it's anything but that. I don't enjoy being powerless in the end of the game when eliminators start to make their final push.

Edited August 4, 2019 by DrakeMarshmallow

[+Ed Venture]

Hi, I won’t be active today unfortunately just checking in to see where things are. @Snipexe Thanks for the endorsement, I guess I’ll see what happens Butt Ad Venture. But you do know how bad at SE I am, right? I think that a player lynch would be a good start especially if we only make one vote, that way we have the smallest chance of a  mistaken alignment. But I’m not willing to vote off a Constable, especially D1, it doesn’t seem worth it. And there is no real evidence, just gut reads.

Edited August 4, 2019 by Butt Ad Venture

[Alvron]

9 hours ago, Burnt Spaghetti said:

Yeah i don't want to be govenor and ill hiss at anyone that nominates me, just throwing that out there!

That is so very tempting.  So very, very tempting.
Too tempting in fact.  I nominate Burnt Ghetti for Gov!

7 hours ago, Haelbarde said:

Fun Fact: There are people learning to drive cars who were born after The Curse of the Black Pearl was released...

Thanks, now I feel really old.  I was driving before that movie was released.

2 hours ago, Shqueeves said:

Also, what happens if we have 2 votes on all three constables? No more than 2 can be killed but all people who tie a lynch die. 

2 hours ago, A Joe in the Bush said:

1 Constable chosen at random will survive.

I could go for this.  It gives us the best odds at finding the corrupt constable, removes the need to waste another lynch should we get it wrong the first time and, more importantly, allows the Gods of Luck and Chance to have the final say, which is always a good idea.  

4 hours ago, Fifth Scholar said:

This is true, and targeting the Constabulary with our first few lynches is probably a good idea; without the ability to correctly discern alignment, this game will become an absolute headache. However, I believe Constable General Altea (Gaea) to be evil, rather than Joe or Wilson. The idea here is that the hardest decisions require the strongest wills, and ultimately shutting down the black market, while being a hefty price to pay, is a price higher than losing free PMs or having a random Survivor role floating around; therefore, by paying it, we’re more likely to be rewarded. Also thematically I feel like Joe would make Gaea evil, though I’ve no hard evidence to back that up. 

This is not a good idea.  If we are only lynching one constable then it should not be Gaea and not just because she's a devoted follower of The All Powerful Alv.  If we lose the Black Market then any items that would normally go there would instead be removed from the game.  Not just my precious Daggers but Whiskey, Ledgers and Warrants.  We would basically be removing every role in the game.  Hoarding of items will occur and the game will grind to a halt with the only kills being that of the lynch.  To me, that's extremely boring.


Now that the boring stuff is out of the way, time to answer the more burning question.  What shall I do with 'Instant Regret'?  

[Haelbarde]

1 hour ago, Alvron said:

Thanks, now I feel really old.  I was driving before that movie was released.

Oh don't worry, it makes me feel old too. But you're welcome.

[+Ark1002]

So... I think we should lynch a constable.

I personally don't have much problem with losing PMs, and 

5 hours ago, Araris Valerian said:

I think we should lynch a Constable as well, and I of course want to lynch Wilson. Seems to me that since everyone likes PMs so much, that’s the constable Joe would make corrupt. Also, this being a QF game, keeping up with PMs on top of the thread seems like a pain. I’ll also vote for Araris to be the governor. Seems like a reasonable enough fellow.

This reasoning isn't half bad.

Except for the governor part.

So Wilson.

For governor, I'm gonna hold off on voting. If we accidently choose an eliminator, that's a huge weapon. If we choose village, they could still cause problems.

So I'm not going to vote on one until there's someone I trust.

[Burnt Spaghetti]

3 hours ago, Alvron said:

That is so very tempting.  So very, very tempting.
Too tempting in fact.  I nominate Burnt Ghetti for Gov!

 

 *Hisssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss*

 

 

[Kidpen]

Hello! I had an unexpectedly busy day, but I'll be back before the end of the turn to place voted and read everything and state opinions.

[Furamirionind]

I'm back. I have read the thread... however I'm exhausted, and hungry... so before I make a post with votes and stuff, at the very least I'm going to eat. (I have had basically nothing for the past 2 days as these cooks didnt respect allergies at all.)

One thing though

5 hours ago, DrakeMarshmallow said:

What theater production? 

I'm the lead sound Designer for the production of Mamma Mia.

The story is bad, and I'm not too fond of the music either, but its had gotten reviews as the best production of Mamma Mia in WA. (Which is a big thing, as almost every theater in western Wa has done it xD)

[Young Bard]

Hmmm... I thought there might be a way of getting around the PM fee (opening all the PM's this cycle and then lynching Wilson) - but that's not possible.

The main problem is that there's a 1/3 chance we just kill two of the constables and then we lose access to PM's and items and we still have unreliable alignment flips. I don't see any way around that though, so Gaea. I like my PM's too much - I'd also be open to killing Joe - I think it would fit Joe's sense of humour that we have to lynch him this game to have reliable lynches - he's also, kind of by definition as the GM, 'in the Elim Doc' as the GM.

Actually, yeah. Gaea, Joe - I'm taking a gamble on Joe's sense of humour, but it's the only thing we've got beyond random chance.

 

 

[DrakeMarshall]

49 minutes ago, Furamirionind said:

I'm the lead sound Designer for the production of Mamma Mia.

The story is bad, and I'm not too fond of the music either, but its had gotten reviews as the best production of Mamma Mia in WA. (Which is a big thing, as almost every theater in western Wa has done it xD)

Right, I think I’ve asked you before, sorry. Probably in a doc or something.

14 minutes ago, Young Bard said:

Actually, yeah. Gaea, Joe - I'm taking a gamble on Joe's sense of humour, but it's the only thing we've got beyond random chance.

Interesting. We’re seeing some pushes against every single constable. How this turns out will say a lot.

Joe has a sense of humor, but Joe is also crafty. Personally I think it less likely that it’s Joe for this reason, though YMMV with this kind of IKYK territory.

[Lumgol]

Hello, checking in. I've only skimmed the thread so far, but I'm here. 

I feel like it would benefit the elims more if PM's were closed (which would prevent village cooperation, pooling of resources, etc), so I'm a bit reluctant to lynch Wilson. It could definitely be the case that Wilson is corrupt and the fact that lynching her closes PM's is meant to dissuade us from doing that. If there's any constable I would suggest lynching today, it would... probably be Joe? Lynching Gaea today would be a waste of her ability, since there's no one in jail right now. Although not being able to buy items would not be fun, I think it's a better alternative than losing PM's. Besides, the elims would better be able to pool their resources and coordinate which items for everyone to use. So, as much as I don't like the idea of not being able to buy items, I think that it'll probably be of more benefit to the village. If anyone thinks otherwise, I would love to hear their explanations  

[StrikerEZ]

I’m glad that several people have started coming to their senses and voting for Joe. I haven’t done a vote count, but I think he’s in the lead if my memory is right. 

Anyway, Drake. He’s the only person up for Governor I’d feel safe having as governor. 

[Elbereth]

15 hours ago, Haelbarde said:

I'll start by throwing my support behind Senator Elentari (Elbereth) for Governor.  

Thank you for the support?  Elentari, for now. Although given that the Governor role takes a majority of players, it seems unlikely anyone will get it for a while. 

12 hours ago, Haelbarde said:

It's be a *very* long time since El and I played the same game, and it's been rare that we've had an opportunity to work together. I trust her to be a sensible Governor, and she'll do a better job than I.

D’aww. Thanks.  I’ll do my best, if it happens. 

11 hours ago, Snipexe said:

It’s because of this fact that I’m going to put a vote on Burnt Spaghetti. Their desire to not be elected, though it could be personal preference, is enough to get a vote from me.

Knowing Burnt, I’m nearly certain this isn’t alignment indicative. It is very on brand for her not to want governorship as a villagers. 

10 hours ago, Furamirionind said:

I think people with daggers should claim. That will give us an idea of how many are out there, and info on who can kill people. That will help narrow down any kills made tonight.

Fura. The eliminators almost definitely would not claim, and if they had any search warrants they could steal and use as many daggers as they had warrants for with impunity. Let’s definitely not. 

10 hours ago, Fifth Scholar said:

As for Governor, I vote no leader. I’d prefer giving this to someone scanned with a ledger, and the Elims can’t hammer this vote if we don’t let them, so we might as well wait to hand it out. Also, I’d be less willing to trust those putting themselves up for it—at best, it’s a bid for glory, and at worst, they’re seeking control of the lynch in the later game. Three votes is a lot, and giving it to anybody D1 seems reckless and potentially deadly. 

@A Joe in the Bush, is this materially any different from a lack of a governor vote? 

7 hours ago, Elandera said:

As for which constable to lynch, I've never been one for PMs so my natural inclination would be to lynch the detective. However, something about Araris' statement made me realize that PMs are very useful for the village, since it gives them ways to communicate and scheme against elims without them knowing. I'd rather have PMs open for that purpose. Lynching the constable general right away might not be a bad idea, as a way to keep elims from using that mechanic to return a player of theirs from the jail.

@A Joe in the Bush

 

I mean, that’s a bit of a contested subject. PMs are universally good for villagers if confirmed villagers are a possibility, but otherwise they’re arguably just as good for elims if said elims are good at manipulation. I don’t think it can really be ruled one way or the other, although others may disagree. 

In case anyone missed it above, I’ll point out again that Governors need to be agreed upon by a majority of players. So it seems highly unlikely we’ll get one for a few turns. 

RP to come, hopefully. 

[A Joe in the Bush]

6 minutes ago, Elbereth said:

@A Joe in the Bush, is this materially any different from a lack of a governor vote? 

It is completely identical.

There is a bit over 3 hours left in this turn everyone.

[Elandera]

I figure I should put my votes down. I like the idea of keeping items flowing through the game while we can, and I get that people want PMs. So Joe. As for governor, I vote we don't elect one this turn.

[Haelbarde]

Alright, some vote tallies:

Lynch Tally
Bard (0): Drake{1}
Con. Joe (4): Striker, Bard{2}, Lumgol, Elandera
Burnt (1): Snipexe
Con. Gaea (2): Fifth, Drake{2}, Bard{1}
Con. Wilson (2): Araris, Ray
Fura (1): Elbereth

Election Tally
Alvron (0): Alvron{1}
Drake (2): Drake, Striker
Elbereth (2): Hael, Elbereth
Venture (2): Snipexe, Venture
No-Vote (2): Fifth, Elandera
Araris (1): Araris
Burnt Spaghetti (1): Alvron{2}