Mid-range game 52: Guard Duty

[+Lotus]

Sigh I'm sorry y'all I forgot to remove the used cards this cycle bear with me I'm Double-checking stuff now.

[Archer]

I expected no one to claim submitting the kill, but I expected somebody to claim having blocked it. Did they just not want to get caught submitting the kill? 

I've previously asked and Illwei implied that people aren't told if they're roleblocked. @Lotus can we get confirmation of that? 

[Kasimir]

5 minutes ago, Archer said:

I expected no one to claim submitting the kill, but I expected somebody to claim having blocked it. Did they just not want to get caught submitting the kill? 

The kill can't be roleblocked. It takes up the card action slot, but the fact that neither of you are claiming protection (well, Drake is) indicates that either the kill was blocked by a protect, or not put in.

[DrakeMarshall]

6 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

Can I clarify: do you still have the card? And were you roleblocked?

Ok ok so actually what happened is I was roleblocked by Archer 

As you can see, I did not stop the kill from happening against you.

I will note that it makes quite a bit of sense for the eliminator in this scenario to forgo making a kill. No matter how you cut it, the odds are just a whole lot worse for the elims in a 1v1 setting.

And considering my history, I can’t imagine why Archer would expect me to be selfish with protective abilities 

Archer, you played terribly. I was pretty sure you were the evil one and not Xino. I just didn’t feel the need to plan for the alternative.

[Kasimir]

1 minute ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I will note that it makes quite a bit of sense for the eliminator in this scenario to forgo making a kill. No matter how you cut it, the odds are just a whole lot worse for the elims in a 1v1 setting.

Honestly, for reasons I am not allowed to talk about, which Archer has alluded to, I am very tired of analysis and the idea of relying on the 50 cent coin that doomed Araris is becoming very tempting. I'm surprised I lasted as long as I did because I am tired >>

But alright, sigh. Let's do this.

Issue for me is voting patterns for Archer are actually a bit worse than yours.

4 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

Ok ok so actually what happened is I was roleblocked by Archer 

Just for me to confirm: you were not roleblocked? (Sorry man it's late and tired. I respect your playstyle and it's fun, but if you can start the sentence with a Yes/No (I know how to read that), I'd appreciate it, help me out a bit here  )

[Archer]

Drake Analysis

Cycle One

It’s interesting that TUO’s first poke was to +1 Kas’ vote on Drake, which I’d argue is more out of character for them than the later retraction was. Drake then chose to vote Kas over TUO in retaliation, ignoring the high likelihood of Kas being village because of their role in the 11 person game. TUO would later retract the vote abruptly when asked about it.

Meanwhile, Drake +1ed Mat’s vote on me, which I’m reading as a pressure vote, but it’s worth noting he never started his own wagons. Drake then quoted me explaining why I think kas is role-cleared, and voted for Kas in disagreement. It’s notable that the vote came when Araris was in trouble. (Wow, we should have stuck to our initial reads, huh.)

Drake then made a one sentence post: “I do not have any orders submited right now to use a sword on you.” That feels like him feeling trolly as an elim.

Late game, when Mat voted TUO, Drake was the first to respond with a verbal shrug at Mat’s reasoning. They then nudged the non-voters to vote, which would have been helpful for both Araris (tied for lead) and TUO (picking up suspicion).

At this point, I explicitly defended TUO. I think he had four votes, most of them poorly explained, which was a red flag for me. I’ll reiterate my defence though: Drake’s vote on Kas looks more like an elim than my theoretical strategy, which was to start a new wagon and expect people to join it and not stay and vote manip.

Cycle Two

Mat was NKed. I suspect it was because he voted for TUO and they planned to kill off people who’d be cleared by his flip/kill off people who might vote for him later. Since he was the middle vote on Elandera, it also directed blame towards me and Kas, who Drake was already sussing, potentially setting up a mix. Mat also voted on me, so while technically they’d be the perfect NK target if I were evil, I’d have avoided killing him because of it if I were an elim.

Drake justified their vote by saying they like ties, then voted for Kas again for pushing back on his strategy of supporting ties for their own sake. Drake’s response to Kas’ vote was doubling down, but not really elaborating on any reasons to suspect him: “But it sounds like you think that I'm actualy suspicious of you. I'm not. I'm trying to throw my vote away, like I said.”

Drake continued to claim Shardblade, which is NAI.  

Drake then made a post explaining why they think TUO is village.

Near the end of the cycle, bam, two people voted on Drake. Drake responded by voting for Striker, his top village read. Note that TUO was light sus in his reads, despite the post he’d made saying they were probably village, and Araris was a village read.

Cycle Three

Interestingly, Drake started with a vote on Araris (former green village read, but whatever, the hour of rollover changes peoples minds ) I +1ed it (Briefly. To be fair though, I think I went from one elim to another, so half points for me?)

In response having one vote on them, Drake then infodumped and was pretty responsive to Kas’ vote on them that made the 2-2 tie.

TUO claimed to have card scanned Drake the previous cycle, which would be an easy e-e thing to fake.

Araris then voted on me, then was hit by a bunch of votes. Here’s where it gets weird, because Drake could have helped Araris stay alive. But if you assume my vote was stable on Drake, and Kas and Ashbringer were Araris’ inclined, and TUO wasn’t around to help… the best they could have done was either switched the kill to Drake or ensured a tie between them. It seems like as good a time to bus as any.

Cycle Four

Drake claimed IRL distractions (same bro), but I’ll note that they didn’t do anything to dissuade us from the mix or to do much heavy backreading. Normally I’d say NAI, but I’m trying to be comprehensive here.

Cycle Five

The only guess I have is that Drake thought Kas had an NK protect card and preferred his chances in a cycle with this setup with a mix on me and more guaranteed NK on Kas than last time.

[DrakeMarshall]

I think it might ultimately be less confusing if I broke my rule at this point.

But I can’t do a yes/no.

Are you asking was I roleblocked yes/no, or was I not roleblocked yes/no?

[Kasimir]

@Archer You fell into the same trap I did. Drake is applying his reverse style to his reads. Striker and I are top suspects. You can see this from the fact Drake Elim reads himself.

@DrakeMarshall Yeah, I don't need a rule break either, just a direct answer to make sure I am understanding. Were you roleblocked? Y/N. What happened to the card then? 

[DrakeMarshall]

Yes.

I was roleblocked.

The card is still in my hand.

[Kasimir]

25 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

Yes.

I was roleblocked.

The card is still in my hand.

Understood. 

Hmmm. Archer claims to have roleblocked Drake. Drake claims to have blocked the kill. One of you is lying. Archer claims he is Honest and his tell is RP. Which could be true. Drake could be an Elim who pulled his understanding of Cheating from TUO. 

To me, it seems like the Elim would not fancy their chances on a 1 v 1 if I play the self protect card. If so, we go into a tie and they get exed. The ideal endgame for them would be a Drake — Archer 1 v 1 either way. 

I'm going to need to do my own backreading. My vote is staying where it is for the moment. Majulah Singapura. 

Edited to add: Players should be told if they're roleblocked. Archer, you specifically expected Ash to be able to tell you if he noticed being roleblocked. I can also confirm this as I have previously checked with Lotus about whether my card action successfully went through. 

Edited to add 2: Interested in what your plans are for this round, gentlemen. I'm very tempted to hit One of Guards at this rate >>

Edited August 9, 2021 by Kasimir

[DrakeMarshall]

I was told that I was roleblocked.

Also note that apparently roleblocks prevent the kill, so if I had tried to made a kill then Archer would have stopped it.

Again, I figure I’ll let the cards fall as they won’t, at this point. I’ve been going out of my way to be evil, I certainly went out of my way to save Araris with both my vote and my card action, and I am fairly confident that village!Drake could have won by now.

[Kasimir]

I'll be honest. I'm too tired to think right now but I did in fact flip a coin for whether to vote Drake or Araris D3 as I was fairly torn between two sets of arguments. 

Yesterday, the coin wanted Archer dead. Today, it still wants Archer dead. My gut says something is wrong with Archer. I think I know what but I also need to refine that nagging sense and think about it more. 

I'm keeping my vote where it is for now. 

[DrakeMarshall]

Wow, I need to flip less coins.

But yeah Kas there is a big rush to get a vote finalized right now, you have no time to chill and maybe think about it later, and I have basically very little confidence in your ability to decide.

[Archer]

My info comes from Illwei, so maybe I've just been talking to the wrong GM. 

Final note while I'm thinking about it: C3, e!me and e!Araris would have been happy to let v!Drake die in a tie. So why didn't either of us vote manip? 

Okay, now you can sleep. I think I've exhausted my list of reasons to think Drake is evol anyway

[Kasimir]

13 hours ago, Archer said:

Okay, now you can sleep.

For no particular reason:

Spoiler

 

@Lotus / @Illwei - I have a further Honest clarification.

I asked last cycle about the conditions under which you would consider a player to be lying. Now, I have a hypothetical for you.

Suppose Wyrm is Honest. He says that he is "pretty sure there will be double deaths from the vote today."

I'd like to check how you would establish this.

Suppose further:

A. Wyrm actually has a teammate, Gamma. Wyrm knows that Gamma is using the One of Pens, which would cancel out Wyrm's Two of Pens, ensuring only one player is removed. Would you rule that Wyrm is lying and require him to perform his tell?

B. Suppose that all of A is true, but Wyrm also thinks that there is a decent chance someone will whip out a vote manip card. Would you rule that Wyrm is lying and require him to perform his tell?

C. How would you establish if Wyrm thinks there is a decent chance someone will whip out a vote manip card?

Edited to add: D. Suppose that Wyrm knows there is no other vote manipulation that could ensure a tie, and thus double deaths. Otherwise, the same as A. Would you rule that Wyrm is lying and require him to perform his tell?

Edited to add 2: Fair warning, currently suffering from insomnia due to a cold, so all you get is incoherent Kas complaints about being tired while reviewing the thread.

Edited to add 3: @Lotus/ @Illwei, tagging because I have a further question. Are the Honest tells reliable? That is to say, if a player is lying, they have been required to unfailingly include the tell? 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Kasimir

[Kasimir]

While I wait on the results of the rule clarification from our GMs, here's the vote pattern analysis:

Voting Patterns:

Spoiler

Here we go again why  The editor even ate my post again because I forgot to save, sigh.

Day One:

Spoiler

 

Lesgo.

Spoiler

Elandera (3): Archer<2>, Mat<3>, Kas<5>
The Unknown Order (2): Mat<2>, Elan, Striker<3>, Kas<4>
Kasimir (2): Drake<1>, Fabien, Drake<3>
Ashbringer (1): Archer<1>, Araris<2>, Kas<3>
Araris (0): Kas<2>, Striker<2>
Archer (0): Mat<1>, Drake<2>
Steel (0): Striker<1>
Striker(0): Araris<1>
Drake (0): Kas<1>, TUO<1>

I regard both Archer and Drake as being on side-trains on that day, since Archer moved onto Elan first, and Drake went back to being on me.

Here's the thing. I still go back to Archer's vote on Elan as creating a side-train. It's very D1 reasoning since players like Eiwlil are sometimes known to vote without reasoning to provoke reactions. We've seen this in a very recent/ongoing game as well. I don't deny it's as good a thread to follow as any D1, but it's a strange hat to hang a lynch on. The feel and the timing of the vote isn't really right.

This is the state of the votes when Archer stab votes Elan:

Quote

Kasimir (2): Fabien, DrakeMarshall
Ashbringer (2): Archer, Araris Valerian
Araris Valerian (2): Kasimir, Striker
The Unknown Order (1): Matrims Dice
Not Voting (4): Steeldancer, Ashbringer, Elandera, The Unknown Order

Under pressure, TUO backs down, and Mat has gone onto TUO. At this point, we have one Elim under threat, potentially with another two coming online. As I noted, Archer pulls off a Villager, and starts a new wagon. I don't think his splinter train reasoning applies at the moment: it does feel like splinter train tactics, TUO is not yet under threat (though potentially so), and the cycle is past the halfway mark. Drake parks on me and remains parked throughout this cycle.

What's telling is that the main switches are very late - Mat to Elan takes place barely an hour before rollover. Kas to Elan takes place at twelve minutes before rollover.

Quote

The Unknown Order (3): Elandera, Striker, Kasimir
Elandera (2): Archer, Matrim's Dice
Kasimir (2): Fabien, DrakeMarshall
Ashbringer (1): Araris Valerian

Without the Mat switch, which came barely an hour before rollover, TUO would have been in trouble. Voting in self-pres would have to be on me, for either of these results:

Quote

Kasimir (2): Fabien, DrakeMarshall
Elandera (1): Archer
Ashbringer (2): Araris Valerian, Kasimir
Araris Valerian (1): Striker
The Unknown Order (2): Matrims Dice, Elandera

or

Quote

Kasimir (2): Fabien, DrakeMarshall
Elandera (1): Archer
Ashbringer (2): Araris Valerian, Kasimir
The Unknown Order (3): Matrims Dice, Elandera, Striker

In the first scenario, a self-pres vote would've been enough. In the second, it wouldn't be. TUO would have to self-pres and use his card. I think TUO was referring to the second scenario. But this doesn't make sense: Striker swapped at 2227hrs - barely 2 hours to rollover. Unless TUO has very awful sleep patterns (guilty as charged), how would he know he needed to get up and self-pres and vote? (Guess he took a nap lol.)

In fact, most of the main vote movements that threatened TUO came fairly late. Elan first votes on TUO at 2037hrs, or under four hours to rollover. Striker's next swap comes slightly under two hours later. I feel like both Archer's and Drake's reactions are more or less warranted at that point: Drake remains on me, and Archer creates an Elan side-train and remains on it. Evil Archer and Evil Drake both have no reason to feel threatened. TUO has a card and can self-pres.

The first sign of worry comes when Striker moves onto TUO at 2227 hours. It's two hours to rollover. Now, TUO would really need to play his card and self-pres. They may not feel too bothered about it. TUO is a Cheater, and cards are meant to be used. 

At 2243hrs, barely half an hour after Striker, I move to TUO.

This is the point where there would be legitimate cause for worry. Neither Drake nor Archer do anything, however. I don't take Archer's argument about going to Ash to be quite the best point. I think the team was relying on TUO if possible, because self-pres is often not inherently suspicious, and the immediate train before I moved to TUO would've been Ash, who would be a low info Villager lynch, or me, which would be a no info GC lynch. Not bad choices.

At 2313hrs, which is exactly half an hour after my move, Mat moves to Elan.

This sets us up for a TUO lynch:

Quote

The Unknown Order (3): Elandera, Striker, Kasimir
Elandera (2): Archer, Matrim's Dice
Kasimir (2): Fabien, DrakeMarshall
Ashbringer (1): Araris Valerian

But there is not necessarily a need for overt Elim action. A single self-pres vote on me or Elan, and TUO's card would have ensured his safety. The problem is that TUO doesn't get on. So the Elim team has been likely waiting, watching, and trying to decide if intervention is necessary. I do know I saw Archer in the thread very close to rollover as I was checking to see if anyone was making swaps after mine.

But then I swap, and there is no need for anything to be done.

I saw Araris and Archer on in the thread at various points, close to rollover. Drake could easily have been monitoring the thread while logged out, of course. I don't think there really was a clearly better play that makes Archer or Drake come off better because TUO wasn't under threat early on. TUO only came under threat very late into the cycle.

 

Day Two:

Spoiler

 

Redoing is a pain. Always save your posts before posting guys.

Spoiler

Striker (4): TUO, Kas<3>, Archer<2>, Kas<7>, Drake<2>
Fabien (2): Kas<1>, Araris<2>, Kas<6>, Striker<3>
TUO (0): Striker<1>
Archer (0): Kas<4>
Araris (0): Archer<1>
Drake (0): Kas<2>, Kas<5>, Steel, Striker<2>
Kas (0): Drake<1>
Ash (0): Araris<1>

Archer moves on to the Striker train. Notably, I created a mid-game 1-1-1 tie between several players, including TUO and Araris. I don't really find this inherently suspicious because I think a Villager also has reason to want to break the tie. 

It's clear my 'Elims usually don't stack' reasoning is not going to hold water here. One of Archer and Drake is Elim and they both went onto Striker, so that's a bust. I don't really see a reason for Drake's vote on Striker other than solidifying the lynch, with a potential shade of self-pres if Striker used a One of Pens and Steel a Two of Pens, and RNGesus moved the lynch to Drake instead. But Drake is a player fine with risk, so maybe not - self-pres is also something I think both Elims and Villagers would care about.

I'm interested in why @Archer and @DrakeMarshall found Striker sus D2. Apologies if I missed it on my backread.

The kill target is interesting. Regardless of alignment issues, Drake, Fabien, and Striker would never be on the kill menu anyway, due to being leading trains Given potential volatility, the Elims risked wasting a kill. Drake's move came two minutes to official rollover, so on the assumption Drake wasn't Elim, he might have been viable enough they wanted to avoid him. And if Drake was Elim, he was obviously never going to be NKed anyway.

So let's look at the remaining pool: <TUO, Steel, Ash, Archer, Kas, Araris>. TUO and Araris were non-starters, Ash wasn't even active and thus wasn't likely to be a kill target. The choice is really between Steel, myself, and Archer. The point of interest is: why go Steel instead of myself or Archer? On the assumption Archer is Village, this becomes especially mysterious because they went for the low info kill over two active Villagers. Of course, it could be that they didn't want to kill game activity entirely, or we could speculate a Drake connection. Another reason is that Archer simply wasn't Village, and so wasn't on the kill menu either.

 

Day Three

Spoiler

 

Almost there...

Spoiler

Araris (3): Drake, Archer<1>, Ash, Kas<3>, Kas<4>
Drake (2): Archer<2>, Kas<2>, Araris<2>
Archer (0): Araris<1>
Ash (0): Kas<1>

I get Archer's reasons, but pulling off the known Elim and going after the other player instead doesn't really give me good vibes, especially doing so after the train attracted a third vote. This could easily be Ash trying to distance as well (at that time.) Just feels way too early in the cycle to get cold feet, though admittedly, Archer was working against a tight deadline.

I take Archer's point that Drake was the only stable target for a self-pres vote, so being the CW shouldn't exonerate Drake. My contention is that I don't think it was obvious early on that Araris would be bussed. I have a high pattern of vote volatility in recent games, and on the assumption Drake was also Elim, this is a deliberate bus that seems to come out of nowhere. I also think Drake could reasonably have pulled off Araris and gone to someone else, for similar reasons as Archer's getting cold feet on Araris generally didn't attract much consternation.

I think we also have some interesting results if we try to work off Araris's status as Honest. But more on that later.

 

I'm not interested in doing D4 as it was a solid-

Sigh, fine.

Day Four

Spoiler

 

Can this pain end

Spoiler

xino (3): Kas, Drake, Archer

Here's the interesting question. Obviously, none of us used vote manip. What's the best play for the Elim? The biggest questions are if I'll self-protect, and if I'll hammer. With both Archer and I having a Two of Pens, a hammer is definitely possible.

Archer was up checking the thread. So was I. 

I actually agree with Archer's contention that the Elim's best play was likely one cycle more, so I'm interested in why @DrakeMarshall thinks it's best to 1v1. Unless the Elim is playing for a tie, facing off against me when I have Two of Pens is a problem. Unless they have a vote protection card, they can't beat me at the lynch. If they do use vote protection or a roleblock, I get lynched, but survive one more round. Otherwise, both of us get lynched, which the Elim cannot survive. And if they put in the NK instead, they get lynched.

Trying to get rid of the GC puts them in a similar problem. Actually, Evil Archer is better placed to go another round. Suppose Evil Archer successfully killed me last cycle. With the Two of Pens he has in reserve, he could easily overwhelm Drake in a lynch. In this scenario, Drake is actually a Cheater, so Archer might not like having to deal with Drake since Drake could cheat in and use different cards, giving him slightly better odds of successfully fighting Archer in a 1 v 1. Evil Drake might or might not be lying about being a Cheater. Suppose Evil Drake successfully killed me last cycle. His declared cards are a roleblock, and Guards. Self-protect doesn't save against the lynch. Drake, when did you pick up your Guards cards? Anyway - Evil Drake would not like his odds against Archer, if that's true.

But the real question is if they can get rid of me, with both me and Drake having declared Guards cards. (Point is moot if it's Drake.) I assume the best play for the Elim now is to get me to mislynch the other and to try to NK me, so I should optimally be using my One of Guards to self protect, after stubbornly having refused all game.

I do find Archer's contention that he roleblocked Drake to be a bit odder. It assumes Drake would have used vote manip, or some role card, and requires the assessment that Drake would not use the NK, as roleblocks don't involve the NK. Archer's confusion about the roleblock rules is a bit weird because on D3, he expected Ash to be able to tell/notice if he was roleblocked.

 

 

Araris's Tell:

While I continue to wait for our esteemable GMs to respond to both Drake's question and my questions asked in the thread, here is my existing analysis of Araris's tell. Because this will change depending on the response to our questions, this should be marked with an asterisk until Lotus or Eiwlil get around to us.

Spoiler

1. Araris #1

Quote

Yes, I am definitely a Voidbinger. That's why my face goes red and black when I'm really angry, you see?

And don't expect further participation from me for some time. Grades are due in ~4 hours.

The context is Drake asking Araris if he is a Voidbringer. But Drake has a typo and Araris repeats it. I presume that interpreting Voidbinger as being something different from Voidbringer would violate Lotus's rule on not getting cute about the spirit of the question. But we do know Araris was a Voidbringer, so he was telling the truth here. The really interesting question is if he was seeding this utterance with his tell, in order to corrupt the data the Village would work from if/when he flipped.

2. Araris #2

Quote

Yeah but vote manip isn't very helpful when you aren't online at the end of the turn.

This is a candidate for a lie, I think. But I'll explain why later. Araris has in fact been online for some rollovers. But this is a direct response to Ash asking Araris if there was anything that could exonerate him from killing Steel. Lotus has clarified that she sees the truth condition of this utterance as being whether or not Araris considers vote manip to be useful to him. Let's just note that this statement is Araris claiming that he has vote manip and that it's unhelpful and move on for the moment.

3. Araris #3

Quote

Nope, I didn't draw anything after the first cycle.

 

Araris claims he only has the cards he started out with/drew on the first cycle. This is an interesting claim. It's possible RNGesus hasn't favoured Araris. But it's also possible Araris is lying. Let's note that as in Araris #3, he responds via a direct quote here. This could be his tell.

4. Araris #4

Quote

There wasn’t really an answer to give, since it was an arbitrary choice at the time.

I feel this could be true regardless of whether Archer is an Elim or not. I don't see Araris as being squeamish about distancing to the point that he would deliberately pick Ash over a teammate. And if Drake is Elim, it would really be an arbitrary choice on Araris's part. Too, if this is a lie, we have to be able to identify what Araris's tell is here. It's not justification, since I've checked Araris's posts for it. There's one post from Araris that looks like it involves justification but like the others, it is left-aligned.

5. Araris #5

Quote

Well, I did mention having a vote manip card earlier, so I'm pretty sure we will have double deaths from the vote today.

 

The truth condition of this claim is an interesting one, because it's a conjunction. Lotus has clarified that she would not consider this a lie if:

Quote

A. It is true that Araris mentioned having vote manip earlier, and
B. It is true that he is certain there will be double deaths today from the vote.

This is the really important one, in my view. Because Araris did mention or imply having vote manip earlier. But if Araris and Drake were teammates, then Araris would not be certain that there would be double deaths from the vote. If it was an intentional bus, it would be the opposite - only one Elim is meant to get lynched.

Which brings us to the question: if Araris #5 is a lie, what is his tell?

Look at the tells we've seen so far. Xino's tell was that he had to use strikethrough text. If Archer is telling the truth, his tell is he has to do RP. In the context of Araris's utterance, we know it can't be formatting. Araris naturally uses left align, as do most players, so requiring that for a tell is weird. Lotus's example was that a player has to use quotations, which to be fair, I can see as a possibility for Araris as well.

Suppose instead that Araris's tell is that he has to only write a single sentence. Does that really make any sense given the trend of the tells we've seen? The tells are all tells which can be hidden in plain sight if the player is clever. Requiring a lying Honest player to write a single sentence post runs in the face of that.

I'm inclined to think that Araris was truthful and this wasn't a bus.

Further question for @Lotus / @Illwei actually:

Suppose Wyrm is an Honest Voidbringer. He is asked, "Are you a Voidbringer?" Unfortunately, the player misspells it and says 'Voidbinger.' Do you consider it against your rule on the spirit of the question if Wyrm answers that he is a Voidbinger? (Specifically, I want to know if you'd require Wyrm to perform his tell under those circumstances.)

In summation, RIP Village, if your fate rests on my player reading skills because that's not my strength >>

This game right now, to me:

Spoiler

Anyway. This post is my last best effort. I'm open to arguments until rollover, and I'll try to rethink if I have the time. I'm also waiting on Lotus and Illwei to get back, and will adjust my credences accordingly.

Until then, I'm with the Singaporean 50 cents coin. Happy birthday Singapore, and Archer. Majulah Singapura.

Edited to add: The C3 point doesn't make sense to me.

16 hours ago, Archer said:

Final note while I'm thinking about it: C3, e!me and e!Araris would have been happy to let v!Drake die in a tie. So why didn't either of us vote manip? 

C3 you were away for half of it. You had no way of knowing if there would be a tie so burning your vote manip would be pointless. Araris did in fact burn his Two of Pens to try to force a tie. C2 makes less sense too - vote manip doesn't work in that context.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Kasimir

[Archer]

Every time Kas mentions their condition, I mentally revise how old I think they are up by five years.

-I can't really remember why I thought Striker was sus. Considering all three of us voted for him, I'm sure there was a good reason 

-Why'd I roleblock Drake? I was hedging my bets. I also think Xino's fairly mild reaction and lack of vote made me nervous something was up. Also, I felt kinda lazy for how little I'd contributed that cycle 

-I specifically did NOT expect Ashbringer to be able to tell if they were roleblocked. Far as a knew, the GMs wouldn't say if a roleblock was successful to anyone. So if Ashbringer submitted the kill, he'd never know what I did, while if he played a card like a card scan, he would know, and could have been cleared of having submitted the kill. Them not knowing was the whole point. 

-I can see Araris' tell being something like must make the post under 100 words. The GMs came up with them on the fly. I would argue that strikethrough text was a difficult one to get if it's not in your playstyle, so I can see them being difficult/obscure. 

-On the subject of tells, I'm curious what you think my tell is, because I haven't been RPing recently and you're still voting for me.

-Anyway, I plan to double vote Drake. I imagine he'll do the same. I'd ask, Kas, that you self protect so you can't be NKed and cause us all to die today. Hey GMs, say the final total was Drake (2), Archer (2), Kas (0) and Kas is NKed. Who wins? @Lotus

[DrakeMarshall]

21 hours ago, Archer said:

Drake Analysis

Cycle One

It’s interesting that TUO’s first poke was to +1 Kas’ vote on Drake, which I’d argue is more out of character for them than the later retraction was. Drake then chose to vote Kas over TUO in retaliation, ignoring the high likelihood of Kas being village because of their role in the 11 person game. TUO would later retract the vote abruptly when asked about it.

Meanwhile, Drake +1ed Mat’s vote on me, which I’m reading as a pressure vote, but it’s worth noting he never started his own wagons. Drake then quoted me explaining why I think kas is role-cleared, and voted for Kas in disagreement. It’s notable that the vote came when Araris was in trouble. (Wow, we should have stuck to our initial reads, huh.)

Drake then made a one sentence post: “I do not have any orders submited right now to use a sword on you.” That feels like him feeling trolly as an elim.

Late game, when Mat voted TUO, Drake was the first to respond with a verbal shrug at Mat’s reasoning. They then nudged the non-voters to vote, which would have been helpful for both Araris (tied for lead) and TUO (picking up suspicion).

At this point, I explicitly defended TUO. I think he had four votes, most of them poorly explained, which was a red flag for me. I’ll reiterate my defence though: Drake’s vote on Kas looks more like an elim than my theoretical strategy, which was to start a new wagon and expect people to join it and not stay and vote manip.

Wow I really was the MVP for the village in this cycle wasn't I 

Quote

Cycle Three

Interestingly, Drake started with a vote on Araris (former green village read, but whatever, the hour of rollover changes peoples minds ) I +1ed it (Briefly. To be fair though, I think I went from one elim to another, so half points for me?)

In response having one vote on them, Drake then infodumped and was pretty responsive to Kas’ vote on them that made the 2-2 tie.

TUO claimed to have card scanned Drake the previous cycle, which would be an easy e-e thing to fake.

Araris then voted on me, then was hit by a bunch of votes. Here’s where it gets weird, because Drake could have helped Araris stay alive. But if you assume my vote was stable on Drake, and Kas and Ashbringer were Araris’ inclined, and TUO wasn’t around to help… the best they could have done was either switched the kill to Drake or ensured a tie between them. It seems like as good a time to bus as any.

I mean, I couldn't possibly have suggested a third option. I rarely suggest third options when I don't like the leading two 

This cycle wasn't LyLo or anything, and it's important to move cautiously and deliberately about these things. If village!Araris and village!Drake were both up for the vote, we would have a lot to lose trying to start something else, I figure. And the Knights Radiant only needed to poach a single vote in order to win. It would make loads of sense for me to allow a tie between two eliminators, whereas it wouldn't make any sense at all for me to make aggressive plays in this scenario.

My vote was a last second self-pres vote. It wasn't there from the start of the turn.

1 hour ago, Archer said:

-On the subject of tells, I'm curious what you think my tell is, because I haven't been RPing recently and you're still voting for me.

I mean if you want to make a post containing only the text "I am village" and nothing else then I would definitely try to stop you from doing that. You had no opportunity to lie about being Honest, so I would simply feel too bad about doing something like this.

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-Anyway, I plan to double vote Drake. I imagine he'll do the same. I'd ask, Kas, that you self protect so you can't be NKed and cause us all to die today. Hey GMs, say the final total was Drake (2), Archer (2), Kas (0) and Kas is NKed. Who wins? @Lotus

I am not at all curious whether you think I have a vote manipulation card or not.

 

---

 

Quote

I'm interested in why @Archer and @DrakeMarshall found Striker sus D2. Apologies if I missed it on my backread.

Striker was probably my third place trust, at the time.

This was somewhat unrelated to the following remark:

Quote

Plus, half the time I’m having trouble trying to figure out what he’s saying, so knowing his alignment and then deciding if there might be any actual info in his posts would be helpful.

I don't really get not putting in the effort to figure out what I'm saying. I am not doing anything weird in this game, after all.

But, if you are putting in that effort now, why wouldn't you do it later?

Just in general, I think using information as a primary justification is fairly trustworthy. Because, it is fairly specific to the target, and doesn't at all just work against any active player.

This was only my third place trust, because justifying a suspicion is pretty much the same as justifying a vote.

I'm sure about whether or not there are other reasons.

I kinda did a great job of explaining this before, but hitting Araris with a vote-swap and vote-manip at the last second was the furthest thing from my mind in that cycle. Since my vote on you looked like it could make a world of difference, I had no intention of moving it elsewhere in a surprising and dramatic fashion. In a game this big, it would be impossible to genuinely catch the eliminator team on the back foot in that way. Fortunately, Araris was devoid of votes by then, and there was already a solid wagon, which definitely didn't steal any of my thunder  But Striker was an unacceptable wagon to me, so I refused to add my vote to it. I'm definitely never pathological about avoiding wagons, but I am kinda less comfortable with last second wagons? Which I think is very normal, now that I say it, but there you have it.

Quote

So let's look at the remaining pool: <TUO, Steel, Ash, Archer, Kas, Araris>. TUO and Araris were non-starters, Ash wasn't even active and thus wasn't likely to be a kill target. The choice is really between Steel, myself, and Archer. The point of interest is: why go Steel instead of myself or Archer? On the assumption Archer is Village, this becomes especially mysterious because they went for the low info kill over two active Villagers. Of course, it could be that they didn't want to kill game activity entirely, or we could speculate a Drake connection. Another reason is that Archer simply wasn't Village, and so wasn't on the kill menu either.

I notice that on that cycle, I expected village!Archer wouldn't make a very good target for the NK, which is why I didn't bother trying to protect them in the first place.

In retrospect, the fact that I was completely off-target about who would be attacked was probably was probably fairly irrelevant to Archer's alignment 

Quote

I also think Drake could reasonably have pulled off Araris and gone to someone else, for similar reasons as Archer's getting cold feet on Araris generally didn't attract much consternation.

I kind of didn't want to do that, even.

It was really only because Archer wasn't already doing it that I did do it.

I really like uncontested wagons ok?

Quote

Here's the interesting question. Obviously, none of us used vote manip. What's the best play for the Elim? The biggest questions are if I'll self-protect, and if I'll hammer. With both Archer and I having a Two of Pens, a hammer is definitely possible.

Archer was up checking the thread. So was I. 

I actually agree with Archer's contention that the Elim's best play was likely one cycle more, so I'm interested in why @DrakeMarshall thinks it's best to 1v1. Unless the Elim is playing for a tie, facing off against me when I have Two of Pens is a problem. Unless they have a vote protection card, they can't beat me at the lynch. If they do use vote protection or a roleblock, I get lynched, but survive one more round. Otherwise, both of us get lynched, which the Elim cannot survive. And if they put in the NK instead, they get lynched.

Hmmm.

You know, you might be wrong about that 

I stand by my statement that village!Drake would have won in a 1v1. My initial thought was sorta that village!Drake could not have convinced one of you to burn the vote manip last cycle (neither of you offered to at any point), but I'm realizing that even then it probably would have been a total victory for me, and not a tie. Not that it would matter to me, because personally I'm usually pretty willing to settle for a tie 

Quote

Drake, when did you pick up your Guards cards?

Uhhh the One of Guards didn't appear at C3 and I definitely didn't pocket the Two of Guards from a cheating spree at the end of C2.

Quote

In summation, RIP Village, if your fate rests on my player reading skills because that's not my strength >>

For what it's worth you are probably worse at it than you think. There are a lot of players that would do the same amount of legwork you are doing right now. We won't be able to find out very soon what that legwork amounts to.

I haven't said a lot of things in this post, but to me, the most solid evidence that I am evil is from C3. Your mileage will be exactly the same as mine, because me and Archer both have exactly as much information as you.

[Kasimir]

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-Why'd I roleblock Drake? I was hedging my bets. I also think Xino's fairly mild reaction and lack of vote made me nervous something was up. Also, I felt kinda lazy for how little I'd contributed that cycle 

I get that, but as the roleblock doesn't stop a NK, it does seem to require you inferred or otherwise assumed he was going to do something roleblockable. I'm also surprised you didn't just go for a late hammer on Drake as you have a Two of Pens and only you and I were on that late. This would have led to a Village win no matter what, as far as Village Archer was concerned.

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-I specifically did NOT expect Ashbringer to be able to tell if they were roleblocked. Far as a knew, the GMs wouldn't say if a roleblock was successful to anyone. So if Ashbringer submitted the kill, he'd never know what I did, while if he played a card like a card scan, he would know, and could have been cleared of having submitted the kill. Them not knowing was the whole point. 

That's exactly what I meant. That you clearly expect players - under a specific set of conditions - to be able to tell if they were roleblocked. So why is there a dispute now about whether players are told if they are roleblocked or not?

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-I can see Araris' tell being something like must make the post under 100 words. The GMs came up with them on the fly. I would argue that strikethrough text was a difficult one to get if it's not in your playstyle, so I can see them being difficult/obscure. 

I think the point I mean is that these tend to be stylistic rather than restricting content. They don't punish the player for lying, merely require them to add in a stylistic marker. They also tend to be less blatant, e.g. no requiring a post to be in size 48 font. A post length restriction is possible, but undercuts content more than an RP tell or requiring you to use strikethrough text at some point in your post, or requiring you to quote. In Fabien's case, the point is moot as we had no record for him.

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-On the subject of tells, I'm curious what you think my tell is, because I haven't been RPing recently and you're still voting for me.

I'm honestly unsure if I even think you are Honest. An Elim team with two Honest players seems a bit too strange - you'd know a decent chunk of roles, which can be informationally neat, while being hobbled by the Honest limitation. You could argue this indicates you are more likely to be Village, but the opposite inference is also possible: that if you are not Village, you picked a harmless role to claim. At the same time, if Drake isn't lying, an Elim team with two Cheaters definitely seems way too stacked, considering that a three man team already seems a bit too strong for these. And the truth is, Drake could be a different role, cribbing off TUO's understanding of the Cheater mechanics. The way I see it, both of you have incentive to claim your respective roles because that's prima facie reason to think that you are not in fact Elim. Archer could have derived his understanding from Araris, whereas Drake could have derived his understanding from TUO.

But it's a good point, and I should go back and dig through your posts because I recall being a bit confused about your tell.

8 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I stand by my statement that village!Drake would have won in a 1v1

So you aren't standing by your statement that Elim!Drake would have lost in a 1v1?

2 hours ago, Archer said:

-Anyway, I plan to double vote Drake. I imagine he'll do the same. I'd ask, Kas, that you self protect so you can't be NKed and cause us all to die today. Hey GMs, say the final total was Drake (2), Archer (2), Kas (0) and Kas is NKed. Who wins? @Lotus

Lotus mentioned it'd be a tie.

11 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I really like uncontested wagons ok?

Why?

11 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

Uhhh the One of Guards didn't appear at C3 and I definitely didn't pocket the Two of Guards from a cheating spree at the end of C2.

Hold up a second. You claimed previously that you obtained a Two of Guards off cheating - C1 Cheat action led to collecting a Two of Guards in C2, which you used to protect Archer. Where did this further Two of Guards come from, then?

13 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

For what it's worth you are probably worse at it than you think. There are a lot of players that would do the same amount of legwork you are doing right now. We won't be able to find out very soon what that legwork amounts to.

Thanks, but cold comfort to the Village I imagine  

[DrakeMarshall]

49 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

So you aren't standing by your statement that Elim!Drake would have lost in a 1v1?

Yes exactly.

“Evil!Drake could win a 1v1” is the exact opposite of what I assumed. And I am not retracting the thing that I assumed.

I try to negate more than one part of a self-contained statement whenever I can, because double negatives are not at all wonky.

I should probably stick to larger sentences.

Negations are easy 

55 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

Why?

Wagons with zero pushback are great, because they tend to be successful.

58 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

Hold up a second. You claimed previously that you obtained a Two of Guards off cheating - C1 Cheat action led to collecting a Two of Guards in C2, which you used to protect Archer. Where did this further Two of Guards come from, then?

I wasn’t roleblocked on that turn.

Which is a shame because otherwise I would still have the card to use up on C4.

1 hour ago, Kasimir said:

Thanks, but cold comfort to the Village I imagine  

Hey, even when you’re right, it makes no difference whether you do analysis in the final stretch or not.

And anyways your analysis is mostly wrong, although of course I wouldn’t tell you that.

I do hope the spec doc for this game is boring  There better not be any illicit betting pools going on in there!! Betting pools are highly immoral.

[+Lotus]

9 hours ago, Archer said:

Anyway, I plan to double vote Drake. I imagine he'll do the same. I'd ask, Kas, that you self protect so you can't be NKed and cause us all to die today. Hey GMs, say the final total was Drake (2), Archer (2), Kas (0) and Kas is NKed. Who wins? @Lotus

Tie.

[+Lotus]

Half a hour left!

[+Lotus]

(Apologies for the triple post)

Anddd that’s time! 

[+Lotus]

MR52: Aftermath

The last bets were cast and the game continued... But what was this? Two of them laid their cards face up on the table, and the crowd gasped. The guard captain, he'd won! But so had Honest Jake as well!

 

---

Archer folded! They were a Honest Voidbringer!

 

---

 

Vote Count:

Spoiler

Archer (2): Kasmir, Drake

Congratulations to the Knights Radiant for winning the game! It was close though! I hope you spend your hard earned winnings on some rosier wine...

Player list: 

Spoiler

 

1. @Matrim's Dice,  Clever Knight radiant

2. @The Unknown Order Cheater Voidbringer

3. @Steeldancer,  Clever Knight radiant

4. @Ashbringer Faleast  Lucky Knight radiant
5. @StrikerEZ Clever Knight radiant

6. @Elandera Lucky Knight radiant

7. @Araris ValerianHonest Voidbringer

8. @Kasimir Karnan, lighteyed swordsman, formerly working for Brightlord Terneas Guard Captian Knight Radiant

9. @ArcherHonest Voidbringer

10. @DrakeMarshallHonest Jake Cheater Knight Radiant

11. @Fabien/Xino Jack Oliver Travis Honest Knight radiant

Mod Doc

Dead Doc

Elim Doc

GM thoughts to come shortly

Edited August 11, 2021 by Lotus

[Kasimir]

Thanks for GMing this to Lotus and Eiwlil. I had fun, though it was also stressful because being one of the last Villagers standing at lylo usually is, not to mention, you know. The thing a number of us can't talk about.

• Quiet RPful game when
   
• As is obvious, I blatantly lied about the One of Guard, figuring at best I might deter a NK, or figure out if someone was a role they shouldn't be if they seemed to know I'd used it up. I used it C3 because Archer gave me a bad feeling I might die. I considered a late hammer on Archer with my Two of Pens but decided that was too chancy. Ultimately, I used my One of Spears during the xino round, praying for a One of Guard or Shardblade, just in case we had to go another round. Thankfully, Drake made a clutch save. And then I pulled a Soulcaster and a Two of Guard, which was not the card I wanted during lylo, but I figured I'd just use it to change my Two of Guard to One of Guard just in case we went another round. I didn't have a One of Guard anyway/anymore so the game plan was: if it ended this round, too bad; otherwise, I'd bluff about having run out of protects from laast round, try to sell the 'gg Village' and try to lure the Elim into going for a NK on me so I could get us lynched together and self-protect.
   
• I did have bad gut about Archer, and I'd kind of worked out why (but I can't talk about it - again!) But I also did flip the Singaporean 50 cent coin because there was only so much bandwidth I had - again, the thing we can't talk about. C3 it said to kill Araris, C4 Archer (I didn't listen), C5 Archer (this time I listened.) Majulah Singapura!
   
• Guess trusting you was the right decision, Drake  Even if it took us at least four cycles to actually work together.
   
• Ash clutch kill. Imma say this again.