Long Game 68: Studies of Ashyn

[+Lotus]

2 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

And you said you're less sure about TJ, so you go after me? That doesn't make sense either.

The patterns I saw clearly made me suspicious of you and Ash. TJ I noticed was someone you both ‘trusted’ but I’m unsure on that. Admittedly, it could be a TJ-ash with you just caught in the crossfire...

Also, I think I made it fairly clear that I was interested in voting for any of you.

[|TJ|]

Alright @Gears. The action I had was a role-block. I was the one who blocked Sart last cycle. Basically chose a player who voted on Mist and hoped I would block the elim kill. @Matrim's Dice, confirming you are a role-blocker too? Whom did you target last cycle? I already sent a PM to Sart as an apology for blocking his action if he was village.

[Mat]

Just now, TJ Shade said:

Alright @Gears. The action I had was a role-block. I was the one who blocked Sart last cycle. Basically chose a player who voted on Mist and hoped I would block the elim kill. @Matrim's Dice, confirming you are a role-blocker too? Whom did you target last cycle? I already sent a PM to Sart as an apology for blocking his action if he was village.

Can confirm, I am a roleblocker as well. Last night I targeted @Ashbringer, who was my top suspect at the time, but apparently he doesn't have an action as he claimed that earlier this cycle, so it was useless. I realize this is a problem as it can't be verified, but I promise that I did target Ash. And now that we have two roleblockers claimed, village protection (if it exists), cause confusion with your action as you see fit.  

[Gears]

Interesting. @Matrim's Dice, there are several possibilities. 1: You lied about having a disease for some reason [perhaps you did not want to PM and wanted an excuse] and now are claiming to target people who have claimed no actions. [In this scenario you are likely an elim.] 2: You genuinely have this disease and targeted Ash. [In this scenario you could be either a villager or elim.] Unfortunately, as you stated, we the general populace cannot differentiate between these two scenarios. I would like to think better of you for your information, but I cannot. However, I do not find you overtly suspicious.

[Kasimir]

[OOC] I'm content to - for the moment - regard it as Villager-on-Villager misunderstanding, especially given the utility of role-blocking but reserve my right to change my views when it's not Cycle 2  I'm happy to leave my votes where they are for now. In any case, I still am not able to give this the level of attention/focus required.

[|TJ|]

3 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Can confirm, I am a roleblocker as well. Last night I targeted @Ashbringer, who was my top suspect at the time, but apparently he doesn't have an action as he claimed that earlier this cycle, so it was useless. I realize this is a problem as it can't be verified, but I promise that I did target Ash. And now that we have two roleblockers claimed, village protection (if it exists), cause confusion with your action as you see fit.  

Okaaay, I'm a little bit less suspicious of you now. Since I no longer have the role-block, and you may be the only other one, if you're a village, it wouldn't be sensible for me to vote on you this cycle. Hopefully you'll hit someone with an action next cycle and we can confirm. Matrim's Dice

Alright, my next suspicion:

When Illwei voted on Ashbringer, they had 3 votes on them and Ashbringer had two (Araris and Matrim). Illwei voted on Ash to make it 3-3 and immediately changed their vote to Mist who had one vote on her to make it 3-2-2 .Doesn't make sense to vote above their self preservation, because even with the double vote it would make it 3(Illwei)-3(Mist)-2(Ash), so Illwei knew someone else would change their vote to Mist so they do not die? Araris was that someone else to make it 3-4 including the double vote. I'm not exactly sure what to make of whole interaction because both Araris and Illwei could have kept their vote on Ashbringer, and Illwei would still have survived. Among the three people involved, Illwei and Araris are more connected. Araris' reasoning to save Illwei was because reasoning on Illwei's suspicion was mostly meta, but the reasoning on Mist's suspicion was.. not at all better. It had votes of Sart, who had vaguely give some reasoning via RP post, and Illwei, who just stated their suspicion without giving any reason (they didn't even tell it was a gut vote). 

Araris Valerian

[Vapor]

16 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Well, I have been. But so has everyone else, and IRL stuff is more busy this week for me. I guess part of it also is that most of what I say in other games is in response to others, and there hasn't been a lot of discussion thus far.

I got some time now, though, so I'll do a few quick reads. [I was ninja'd like 10 times, though, thanks...]

• Gears- I sort of agree with the implication that he's seeming to distract us, but there hasn't really been a lot to focus on in the first place. I read this more as a villager trying to generate discussion rather than an elim trying to divert our attention. Mild Village read
• Ash- I suspected them C1 for RPing a lot but not saying anything, but since then they've been a lot more discussion-minded. Null
• Pyro- The current lynchee, though I'm not certain how I feel about the reasoning. He's normally chaotic in every game he plays, so that kind of thing I view as NAI. Null
• Teft- Completely inactive, Null. @Teft the mosshead
• Araris- Just voted Mist instead of Mint, might want to fix that  but they seem to be contributing a fair amount, I notice they are agreeing with Sart, though I have a good feeling about their posts. Mild Village read
• TJ- Has been significantly quieter this cycle, but has not only roleclaimed in this game but also claimed that they lost their role, both things I feel an elim would be less likely to do. Mild Village read 
• Straw- I was going to tag him to post, but he ninja'd me above. Even so, too little material to properly analyze, so Null
• Mint- Had some thoughts on voting, but hasn't voted/been around that much. Null
• Lotus- I suspected them earlier for the same reasons as Ash, except they haven't done anything to remedy this. Lotus remains my strongest Elim read
• Illwei- My gut says Illwei is village but my analysis brain tells me he seems more elim. I'd consider voting him later, if he was a lynch candidate, but for now Null. I should and probably will reread his posts, though.
• Vapor- @Vapor should post more :P. Null
• Kasimir- Kas seems to be the same as the QF- giving suspicions, voting patterns- it's a bit hard to tell, with his playstyle, but I'll say Mild Village read
• Sart- Voting their suspicions, pointing things out, to me Sart seems to be genuinely trying to help. Mild Village read
• Lahilt- Lahilt jumped on the Pyro train with little explanation, which seems a bit suspicions to what I was already thinking about their voting this game. Mild Elim read 
• Devotary- Hasn't said anything this cycle, and little before. Null. (@Devotary of Spontaneity)
• Striker- Possibly tunneling on Gears, though the suspicion isn't terribly grounded. Null leaning on Mild Village

Sorry, I don't have my phone currently so I have to wait until someone unlocks the family computer for me.

12 hours ago, Kasimir said:

Sart claimed to be role-blocked on N1. Here, have a look:

Hmm. @Vapor, Pyro, Vapor. Who do you suspect? What are your thoughts?

I'm not sure who I suspect. I think that for now, I'll vote Lotus so I don't die. I will get on later.

[Lahilt]

A compilation of my current thoughts/reads

Illwei, as mentioned by TJ above changed from Ash to Mist even though Ash had more votes. Expressed suspicion of Pyro and Mist in the same post for unknown reasons and voted mist. Has yet to follow up on the suspicion of pyro even after Pyro gets votes this round. List of reads day 1 is vague.

Pyro, I am suspicious of Illwei interactions with Pyro also the wanting to not catch disease/superpowers feels off

Araris Valarian, TJ brings up a good point on Araris switching their vote on mist. I feel that this might be a little to obvious exposure for Araris to make. Unsure but suspicious 

Matrims Dice, if the questions is whether Mat really has a roleblock or is lying about it.  @Matrim's Dice block a vote manipulator during this day cycle and they can confirm.

 

[Mat]

6 minutes ago, Lahilt said:

Matrims Dice, if the questions is whether Mat really has a roleblock or is lying about it.  @Matrim's Dice block a vote manipulator during this day cycle and they can confirm.

Well, the only vote manip I know of is Illwei, so it'd have to be him, and I was planning on saving my action for the night turn.

[|TJ|]

Yeah, proving Mat is a role-blocker doesn't prove his alignment. I'd rather him try to block the elim kill. Elim!Matrim would have no reason to lie about his disease as he might be caught about his lie, and village Matrim simply would not lie. Just to confirm, @Matrim's Dice, I'll send you a numbered list of diseases in PM ( I do not want elims to connect the name of the disease to the actions). Reply here on thread with the number adjacent to the disease you have. 

Edit: Sent.

Edited August 7, 2020 by TJ Shade

[Mat]

@TJ Shade, I have #2. Though if I may ask, how do you have a list? Or did you just make the rest of those up :P.

[Araris Valerian]

2 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

Araris' reasoning to save Illwei was because reasoning on Illwei's suspicion was mostly meta, but the reasoning on Mist's suspicion was.. not at all better.

I would disagree. I thought that lynching Illwei would be worse than lynching an essentially random person. Unfortunately, I didn’t change my vote until near the end of the cycle, so the difference was marginal.

2 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

I'm not exactly sure what to make of whole interaction because both Araris and Illwei could have kept their vote on Ashbringer, and Illwei would still have survived.

So you should conclude that of myself, Illwei, and the vote manipulator (who could be Illwei I suppose), at least one of us is not an elim. I personally consider it somewhat likely that the vote manip was elim, which means that one of myself/Illwei is village. So IMO, there is a stronger negative connection between us than not. And besides, I’d be happy to lynch Illwei this cycle because of my suspicions of the vote manip (which I already briefly mentioned).

[|TJ|]

6 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

@TJ Shade, I have #2. Though if I may ask, how do you have a list? Or did you just make the rest of those up :P.

I made them up xD 

And that is the correct answer.

I sent Matrim a list of 10 diseases, and he chose the one I had. I need no more proof that he indeed is a role-blocker. 

3 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

So you should conclude that of myself, Illwei, and the vote manipulator (who could be Illwei I suppose), at least one of us is not an elim

Illwei claimed to be the vote manipulator. 

[Kasimir]

36 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Well, the only vote manip I know of is Illwei, so it'd have to be him, and I was planning on saving my action for the night turn.

I'd agree with this, TBH. His Divine Grace ( @The_God_King) has already ruled that a unique action can only be performed once a cycle. In other words, proving it by using it during the day is kind of pointless - well, it'd prove that Mat is telling the truth, but as @Gears pointed out (and TJ, ninjaed), an Eliminator may still be truthful. At the start of the argument, when we were presented with a dichotomy between Mat and TJ, such that it seemed only one of them could be truthful, being able to verify Mat as a role-blocker would've been valuable. It's less valuable now, especially given the opportunity cost.

Why? Because if you can block an Eliminator Night Kill, that would be immensely valuable. That saves a life, and tells us who an Elim is. (No pressure, eh, Mat?  Gamma still holds the SE record for goalkeeping, I think. IIRC - LG2 or something, before my time, he blocked several consecutive Elim kills. That's pretty awesome  I aspire to a shadow of his greatness.)

Anyway, thanks @Vapor, Vapor. Perfectly understandable, where tech issues are concerned  

I think my current trouble now is that without the space, attention, and focus to do analysis, I'm ending up doing the thing where I vote based on things that jump out at me. Which may or may not be Village/Elim. But I'm still going to be only half-present (which I hope is better than not present at all) until I clear the reports that got dumped on me. I do want to at least attempt to contribute to the ongoing discussion though, so:

Araris. Let's add some pressure Partly a bit of a negative gut read off your diagnosis of Silberfarben's death. I'm trying to put my finger on what makes me uneasy about it. I'm going to assume it's down to the Eliminator profile you mentioned. And partly because I distrust how you're trying to suggest that my self-voting was specifically for the purposes of dodging your vote. Dodge what? Why would I bother? I have a known history of self-voting for various reasons and I have the receipts. Among them, MR4 (you were the Eliminator there, and you killed me), and we played AG and AG2 together, among others. You played all those games with me - I don't see how you get off trying to toss suspicion around like Salt Bae  

Why do you think Mint and Illwei are connected, more than Mint attempting to use her GM PM text to claim Villager smack in the middle of D1?

Edited: hi i is wols i is ninjaed by everyone and their skaa

Edited August 7, 2020 by Kasimir

[Ashbringer]

2 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Can confirm, I am a roleblocker as well. Last night I targeted @Ashbringer, who was my top suspect at the time, but apparently he doesn't have an action as he claimed that earlier this cycle, so it was useless. I realize this is a problem as it can't be verified, but I promise that I did target Ash. And now that we have two roleblockers claimed, village protection (if it exists), cause confusion with your action as you see fit.  

Well, I cannot confirm if I got roleblocked, for the reason you said. But this also tells us that Sart has a role. Which makes me a little jealous that I still don't...

To respond to a few things:

3 hours ago, Lotus said:

The patterns I saw clearly made me suspicious of you and Ash. TJ I noticed was someone you both ‘trusted’ but I’m unsure on that. Admittedly, it could be a TJ-ash with you just caught in the crossfire...

Also, I think I made it fairly clear that I was interested in voting for any of you.

Lotus, I kind of innately trust TJ because I've read him bad incorrectly two games in a row. I've also never played against Elim!Matrim, and I trust(ed) him for that and just being fairly active. Although TJ raises a few good points that may take my read on Matrim down a few notches.

But could you clarify what "patterns" you see besides a cycle of trust?

2 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

I would disagree. I thought that lynching Illwei would be worse than lynching an essentially random person. Unfortunately, I didn’t change my vote until near the end of the cycle, so the difference was marginal.

So you should conclude that of myself, Illwei, and the vote manipulator (who could be Illwei I suppose), at least one of us is not an elim. I personally consider it somewhat likely that the vote manip was elim, which means that one of myself/Illwei is village. So IMO, there is a stronger negative connection between us than not. And besides, I’d be happy to lynch Illwei this cycle because of my suspicions of the vote manip (which I already briefly mentioned).

So your defense seems to be saying that TJ's analysis is just... wrong... interesting.

 

Hmm. Main suspicions are Striker and Araris for elim-ness, and then Mat and Illwei as half-elim-nessand half-info lynch possibilities. But I'll stick with Illwei for now, in an effort not to just mimic TJ's reasoning.

[+Lotus]

Just now, Ashbringer said:

But could you clarify what "patterns" you see besides a cycle of trust?

Not many people have been reading people as trustworthy in the first few rounds. You, Mat and TJ all read one of each other as trustworthy-ish and one as null.

I would share the sheet but I’m fairly certain that GMs don’t like that.

[---]

16 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

I would disagree. I thought that lynching Illwei would be worse than lynching an essentially random person. Unfortunately, I didn’t change my vote until near the end of the cycle, so the difference was marginal.

So you should conclude that of myself, Illwei, and the vote manipulator (who could be Illwei I suppose), at least one of us is not an elim. I personally consider it somewhat likely that the vote manip was elim, which means that one of myself/Illwei is village. So IMO, there is a stronger negative connection between us than not. And besides, I’d be happy to lynch Illwei this cycle because of my suspicions of the vote manip (which I already briefly mentioned).

Why would lynching me be worse than lynching an "essentially random person" when I was a essentially random person, if not a more suspicious one? You seem to insist that I am not the vote manip, and I'm just claiming to maybe have the village get off my back, but you would rather vote Mint than me when you seem to be positive I'm Elim? 

EDIT:

3 minutes ago, Lotus said:

I would share the sheet but I’m fairly certain that GMs don’t like that.

I was under the impression that what they didn't like was sharing editable things?

Edited August 7, 2020 by Illwei

[|TJ|]

@Lotus I don't read people as trustworthy. I categorize their posts as village, elim or null. As such, Ash's post I quoted earlier seemed village. Hence at that point in time, I gave him a village read. That does not mean I trust him at all, and obviously my read will change during the course of the game according to his actions. Same applies to everyone. 

And I'd imagine elims would try to stay away from each other rather than blatantly give each other village reads. That would form a clear elim chain when one of them is lynched. 

And you could probably share the screenshot of the sheet. 

[Kasimir]

1 minute ago, Illwei said:

I was under the impression that what they didn't like was sharing editable things?

That's in another place @Straw plays in, IIRC.

I'll flag @Elbereth and the GMs ( @Elkanah and @The_God_King) for this, but the last time the ruling was communicated to me (MR38) by the IM and GM, the issue is that SE used to have a competitiveness problem that was turning players off, and there's a worry encouraging or permitting comprehensive sheets or visualisations would encourage the return to that. I was also told that using visualisations was discouraged because you're supposed to communicate things in your own words, and the visualisations can cut right through that, especially if you're very good with them. Anyway, flagging El because the official ruling might have changed.

(As of the last QF, my understanding from some semi-official communications was that it hasn't been explicitly banned yet, but also, prefer if you don't.)

tldr; It's Complicated.

[Mat]

2 minutes ago, TJ Shade said:

And you could probably share the screenshot of the sheet.

@Lotus, I would personally ask the GM's first. @The_God_King @Elkanah

Edit: Ninja'd by Kas

Edited August 7, 2020 by Matrim's Dice

[Kasimir]

Just now, Matrim's Dice said:

@Lotus, I would personally ask the GM's first. @The_God_King @Elkanah

Edit: Ninja'd by Kas

You've ninja-ed me enough times. Now I am the Master 

[Ashbringer]

I'm sure the GMs will love all these tags... 

[+Lotus]

20 minutes ago, TJ Shade said:

 

@Lotus I don't read people as trustworthy. I categorize their posts as village, elim or null. As such, Ash's post I quoted earlier seemed village. Hence at that point in time, I gave him a village read. That does not mean I trust him at all, and obviously my read will change during the course of the game according to his actions. Same applies to everyone.

 

Yes. I just put ‘trusts’ ‘null’ or ‘distrusts’ because that’s how I think of it.

 

21 minutes ago, TJ Shade said:

 

And I'd imagine elims would try to stay away from each other rather than blatantly give each other village reads. That would form a clear elim chain when one of them is lynched. 

Yes, I do agree. I just found it suspicious enough that I thought it was worth investigating.

[Straw]

29 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

That's in another place @Straw plays in, IIRC.

Yeah, I know Mafia Universe has a policy against sharing editable things, but IDK about SE 

[StrikerEZ]

So, I went to sleep thinking I'd wake up and put a vote on Mat (wanted to wait until he was able to get on and respond to the accusations and stuff) and now I'm thinking that the most likely scenario is that TJ and Mat is just village/village.

I'm not sure if I still suspect Gears, but I'm also not sure how I feel about the sudden shift onto Araris either. I wasn't getting super bad vibes from his posts at all, and I think his voting pattern could be a villager one as well. I'd be more willing to lynch Illwei if anything else, personally.