Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 4 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said: Great, right as I'm about to post this I get ninja'd by both Aman and Kas with a multiquote apiece, hello guys What is Maili, chopped liver? :eyes: Spoiler 5 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said: ^A large part of my v lean of Archer right now is this Why? I'm conflicted because my impression of him is that he does this no matter which team he's on (with a couple of exceptions.) But at the same time, I also feel that when I read his thought process, I can't really see it coming from an Evil place. Which is why I'm kind of splitting the difference right now. 1
Mailliw73 he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 3 minutes ago, Kasimir said: What is Maili, chopped liver? :eyes: My posts are much quicker and easier to digest. I’ll leave the analysis to you two.
Mat he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 1 minute ago, Kasimir said: What is Maili, chopped liver? :eyes: Maill was after I typed that sentence :P. But also not a multiquote. 1 minute ago, Kasimir said: Why? I'm conflicted because my impression of him is that he does this no matter which team he's on (with a couple of exceptions.) But at the same time, I also feel that when I read his thought process, I can't really see it coming from an Evil place. Which is why I'm kind of splitting the difference right now. I don't really remember Archer making a lot of D1 plans as elim, which I think is why I agree with him more when he's elim The other part of my v lean was my gut disagreement with his takes and my history of disagreeing with v!Archer and agreeing with e!Archer, but that's an untrustworthy read in general so it's just a v lean as opposed to a v read.
Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 4 minutes ago, Mailliw73 said: My posts are much quicker and easier to digest. I’ll leave the analysis to you two. Keredin raised an eyebrow. "I think we should leave the analysis to...Awoman," he said. As far as Keredin was concerned, he was here to woo Adolin Kholin even if the Azish nobleman was distracting...in the best possible way [OOC: Please KIV I said before the game I will flirt lightly with players sporting male characters. If this makes you uncomfortable, please ping me and I will back off. I'm trying to rediscover the ability to play SE with more RP and less overcommitment, having hit a hard wall in terms of how much focus and attention and energy I could bring with AG8, MR56, LG83, and BT1 all back-to-back. So...encourage me to RP more and not go guns blazing all the time, please? Cannot promise this will hold when ML guilt happens or when there is solving to be done (!), but it is important at least to try to break the cycle.]
Amanuensis he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 (edited) Per Archer + Ash's Broad Vote Proposals: Thaidakar, Striker, Illwei My vote is submitted, though I may change it tomorrow. Fairly comfortable with this D1 pool barring further discussion. Going to bed now, but please talk more while I'm gone. I expect us to at least be on page 5 by the time I wake up. Also Lotus wants to see RP, folks! I'll do some tomorrow too. Happy hunting / wooing <3 Edited March 10, 2022 by Amanuensis
StrikerEZ he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 35 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: Basically, when Archer proposed his broad-reads-anon-voting thing, I walked myself through how people might approach it from a Village perspective and an Elim perspective. In this case, Villagers could react in pretty much any way depending on individual playstyle (in which case, I'd rely on tone reads / logical consistency to determine sincerity) while Elims would likely react in a narrower, more straightforward denial kind of way (with some exceptions depending on risk appetite) that overall looks Village-positive, in order to seem like their contributing without actually doing much. You fit the bill, as did Illwei, so for a D1 lead, that's what I'm looking at today. …so if villagers can react in any way possible. And you say elims can react in the straightforward way…on the outside, there is no way to tell if a straightforward denial reaction is elim or village. According to your logic here. Which I find fundamentally flawed and proscribing a lot of things about what an elim may or may not do. If that make sense. 37 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: Can buy that RP voice and structure forced me to interpret what you meant by these observations more, and since I was looking for a particular red flag and you waved it, my brain jumped to less charitable takes. That said, I really don't know how to read Devo early in games (let alone for what she's posted so far), so if you've got something that could enlighten me there, I'd appreciate it The slight good read I have of Devo comes from her being helpful with looking at the past game and trying to call out Archer’s change in stance since then. Granted, that is not necessarily alignment indicative, but it feels like a lot of work for an elim to go through. 39 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: 1 hour ago, StrikerEZ said: But, like. Why would an elim react that way in this circumstance, or even mention retaliating? As you pointed out, TUA kind of agreed with what Archer was saying, so it's not like he's sus of him. Personally, I would expect an elim to not care about a single random vote (that's just a maybe between 3 options) when they've got 2 other elims to vote alongside them. Feels like a standard Villager-reacts-to-page-1-poke-vote-with-a-poke-vote to me. Hmmm. My thought process was more that TUA would’ve been feeling pressure from Archer and was trying to react to that, but you’re right that he wouldn’t really need to feel much pressure in that scenario. I’ll have to rethink TUA. 41 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: I'll admit, that's even weirder to me. So if Archer flips V, you'd think Ash is probably E because he engaged with Archer's broad-votes proposal? No, like…Archer and Ash are both players I suspect. If people don’t wanna go for Archer, I could go for Ash. My suspicions of them are independent of each other, even if how I originally got to Ash was through Archer. Does that make sense? 42 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: Yup. Her first post mostly just said what I already did a few posts up + mentioned there'd be 4 elims if the game wasn't properly balanced on top of the fact shorter cycles and hidden votes are elim-sided + expressed the opinion that secret votes are bad (flag I was looking for). Altogether, it feels like a post for the sake of posting / looking village, rather than a post for the sake of solving the game. To me this reads like Illwei trying to genuinely work things out as a villager rather than being performative. But I’ve also done similar things as an elim. So idk. 32 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said: This reeks of fabrication to me, because that's not how I think that went down at all. I wasn't aggressive for either side because I'm kinda 'eh' for both voting arguments so the back off wasn't a back off at all. I'm curious where you got 'back off' from Me disagreeing with Archer about hiding votes the whole game Me realizing that Archer wasn't speaking about the whole game, only C1, and being okay with that (to some extent) Me liking Ash's suggestion as it provides a medium Cause that looks pretty consistent to me To me this take looks like you needed a reason to read me as something and pulled it out of thin air. I get a similar vibe from a lot of the other reads on your list as well. Full reads lists early on come from an elim more often than not, see Hyena from the AG for an example. I think I took your #1 as a stronger stance and therefore felt like #2 was you backing off when you saw the reactions to Archer and stuff. I can see how that’s not really what was going on. And I wanted to get a full reads list in because I feel it will help me later in the game. Gives me a basis to go off of. Assuming I don’t get exed or killed before the end of the game. Which, looking at my survival record, is pretty likely. :/
Ashbringer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 42 minutes ago, Kasimir said: I... Are you and Archer really having a potayto-potahto disagreement? Because either I'm dead tired or I'm not seeing a substantive difference in your suggestions - I'm going to assume you're committed to this as a more long-term strategy than Archer is, and also, that you want a vote pool of two whereas Archer suggested...two or three. … I’m gonna be honest, I hyperfocused on Archer saying elims don’t like randomness and wanting broad suspicions that I completely glossed over his recommendation for two/three names with one real vote. Maybe an agreement in practice but not in intent? Idk. For some reason I feel more exhausted at 7 PM than at 1 AM so I may come back to this later.
Illwei Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Amanuensis said: Illwei: Agrees with Illwei's takes on elim numbers, vote accountability, and Mat vote. Can assume this means v!read too. 15 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: Thaidakar, Striker, Illwei Unironically Villagery, And also liked the @ing of the four people (why only those 4?) being like "you see how I'm more like my village games, right?" just felt very completely not worried at all about how he is percieved. EDIT: realized that that was a summary of Striker's notes I should read more Edited March 10, 2022 by Illwei
Archer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 2 hours ago, Amanuensis said: I had to do a lot of cross-referencing for Vanala's notes so will translate (and summarize) for anyone else who's lazy like I am. Reveal hidden contents Note that colors are my interpretations and may not be 100% accurate. Yellow = Null, Orange = Sus, Green = Trust, Black = Inactive Kasimir: Agrees with Kas' take on Archer's random strat, but "needs to be wary of him still" due to not being active beyond that. Matrim: Suspects Mat for initially being opposed to Archer's random strat only to back off shortly after. TUA: Agreed with me (tbh I just pointed it out, don't actually think TUA is sus for this) that they reacted strongly to Archer saying he might be voting TUA. Devotary: Points out that of her few posts, Devo's were "astute," and goes to suggest not having more to say about Devo means their probably not a murderer. JNV: Agrees with JNV's opening post and supports further investigation of Archer (without voting for Archer themselves). Believes elims would not enter the thread this aggressively. Archer: Appreciates later points but refuses to look past earlier ones. Takes the stance that Archer is backtracking after making a mistake. Experience: Only says their right about vote accountability, but doesn't seem to have a read on him. ("As much as I hate to admit it." Why hate? Admit what?) Ashbringer: Finds most of what Ash has said as agreeable + appreciates Ash is holding himself accountable, but doesn't understand why he's defending Archer's proposal. Suggests that if Archer is elim, Ash requires further scrutiny. Mailliw: Hasn't posted until now. Side-eyes for inactivity so far but wants to focus on the talkers. Thaidakar: Basically gleans nothing from Thaid's few posts, but instead of susing Thaid for posting thrice and vanishing without participating more, just says "I wish she would interact with us more." Amanuensis: I'm assuming I'm green because apparently I've said things Striker agreed with (TUA call out) and said nothing that he didn't agree with? @StrikerEZ Lotus has you as Stricker in the player list so that's why I made the @Stricker joke. Illwei: Agrees with Illwei's takes on elim numbers, vote accountability, and Mat vote. Can assume this means v!read too. Bort: Hasn't posted. Side-eyes for inactivity so far but wants to focus on the talkers. Orlok: Hasn't posted. Side-eyes for inactivity so far but wants to focus on the talkers. Okay so, I still am up for exeing Thaid but Striker is by far the riper option. Here's why: ... This is... remarkably thorough. Thanks! But also, sus? I wanna say this gives off similar vibes to JNV's post voting for me, just better put together. The analysis is fine, I'm just triggered by how direct it is. 2 hours ago, Mailliw73 said: Yes, mostly. And the italicized part is at least half my motivation. What’s the point of a game mechanic if it’s never used? If Lotus wanted it built into the game, it storming well should have a point. Two implications: 1. Elims can secretly hammer 2. Village can spread pressure. That's what we're playing with, although the benefit to the GM at rollover is nice too. :P. 1 hour ago, StrikerEZ said: It’s because I was trying to do it in RP and honestly didn’t have much of a read on Devo. I didn’t think I was trying to tie Ash’s alignment to Archer. Was more trying to say that Ash would be my first person to look at if Archer doesn’t pan out. …I knew I forgot to do something. I was barely able to keep my eyes open as I was doing the second half of that post, so it slipped my mind to actually add a vote. Archer. grr that's a villagery thing to admit. *When. :P. The formality of red text was unnecessary, which is interesting. 31 minutes ago, Amanuensis said: Basically, when Archer proposed his broad-reads-anon-voting thing, I walked myself through how people might approach it from a Village perspective and an Elim perspective. In this case, Villagers could react in pretty much any way depending on individual playstyle (in which case, I'd rely on tone reads / logical consistency to determine sincerity) while Elims would likely react in a narrower, more straightforward denial kind of way (with some exceptions depending on risk appetite) that overall looks Village-positive, in order to seem like their contributing without actually doing much. You fit the bill, as did Illwei, so for a D1 lead, that's what I'm looking at today. But, like. Why would an elim react that way in this circumstance, or even mention retaliating? As you pointed out, TUA kind of agreed with what Archer was saying, so it's not like he's sus of him. Personally, I would expect an elim to not care about a single random vote (that's just a maybe between 3 options) when they've got 2 other elims to vote alongside them. Feels like a standard Villager-reacts-to-page-1-poke-vote-with-a-poke-vote to me. Can anyone else confirm that how I'm talking now feels like I did in my last few village games? @Kasimir @Archer @Matrim's Dice @Ashbringer This is an interesting take because I had different assumptions about how people would react. I figured elims would hedge more than villagers. TUA's either overreacting to pressure or poke for poking, and I need more from them to figure out which is which. Village points for drawing attention to yourself, I guess. 30 minutes ago, Kasimir said: This is actually generally my view, and I've also expressed before my distaste of overfocusing on Grand Plans C1. I respect their role as a discussion stimulus, but I am always of the mind that players are going to player, and it's a nice way to avoid having to spend more time discussing suspicions. Will wonders never cease. You know my Elim meta when I myself haven't the faintest idea due to not having randed Evil in seven years! (The BT doesn't count in my view - time and hour pressures were too distortive, so I'm just relegated to making educated but potentially out-of-date guesses.) Hmm. Okay, so fair enough. Is it fair to say then that you expect things to be played a bit more straight once we have voting results from C1 to go off? Possibly with a bit of leeway due to anon/thread mismatch shenanigans? I agree with this, but I think that's why knowing the suspect pool matters. I could see someone who is indifferent between two or three suspects just going to RNGesus for it, but being able to declare your pool and how you come by your pool matters too. It's the 'show your working' deal again. And I guess in saying this, I've more or less talked myself around to Archer's perspective, so there's that, along with the fact I don't think you and Archer actually substantively disagree. @Amanuensis Spoken like a man who lives for vote analysis :P. The BT totally counts! I haven't really read it, but I'm sure you slipped out many obvious tells that I can identify later. Next Cycle should be more direct. I think you can have multiple valid suspects, so how you rank them is a minor enough detail that missing explanations for that specifically won't kill us. I lost the quote where you ask about my change in views. My earlier comment was mostly a reaction to this being one of the first posts I saw on my skim: :P. Quote (Aftermath) To Archer, when all is said and done: I genuinely think your reasoning on Tani is terrible. Even if you found the mark, that was just chance. Then I went and looked at the post Devo is talking about and wouldn'tyaknowit Quote -I support using the coloured votes system to keep track of intentions. I foresee maybe 75% of those being accurate, then about a quarter of people are going to claim to have switched last minute or that they wanted to mis-lead the elim team. The elims benefit more from doing that than the villagers do, so if we can avoid normalizing that, I’d appreciate it. -If you don’t want to commit to a public vote, I suggest you give us your top three suspicions and commit to voting one of the people on the list. Communication is important. Your goal should be to get village read so we can avoid mis-exing you. You need to give us some thoughts to analyze so we can do that. Thank you in advance. The second part is actually very consistent which is funny because I thought it was an original idea. I'm going to guess that the difference is this time I have a better understanding of SE meta and some theories to test. 20 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said: To me this take looks like you needed a reason to read me as something and pulled it out of thin air. I get a similar vibe from a lot of the other reads on your list as well. Full reads lists early on come from an elim more often than not, see Hyena from the AG for an example. ^A large part of my v lean of Archer right now is this I'm split between yes, elims do that because they feel the need to be thorough and it helps hide the specific points they wanted to make against Striker's getting a lot of heat because he's the first person to put out a lot of reads. I usually spend signup week thinking about the fun I could have with the brief. So I often go into games with something in mind that e!me can easily share if I'd like to. As the elim doc of the last MR will show, I'm aware it's good for getting village cred and I'd like to avoid the impression that my creative juices are being occupied by evil strategizing. So don't give me too much cred. :P. Just now, Kasimir said: [OOC: Please KIV I said before the game I will flirt lightly with players sporting male characters I dare you to flirt with Albert 1 minute ago, Ashbringer said: … I’m gonna be honest, I hyperfocused on Archer saying elims don’t like randomness e!Ash was insulted, I see. :P. 1 minute ago, StrikerEZ said: The slight good read I have of Devo comes from her being helpful with looking at the past game and trying to call out Archer’s change in stance since then. Granted, that is not necessarily alignment indicative, but it feels like a lot of work for an elim to go through. I'm pretty sure it's NAI, because who does old game reading, regardless of alignment. I felt like they did the work and wanted something to show for it so they brought up my post. * Putting in a vote on one of TUA (I've seen them overreact to pressure as an elim before), Striker (the reads list was too supportive of JNV), JNV (argued why my plan was bad, not why I was suspicious to justify their vote). 1
Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 5 minutes ago, Archer said: This is... remarkably thorough. Thanks! But also, sus? I wanna say this gives off similar vibes to JNV's post voting for me, just better put together. The analysis is fine, I'm just triggered by how direct it is. What do you mean by direct? 5 minutes ago, Archer said: Spoken like a man who lives for vote analysis :P. The BT totally counts! I haven't really read it, but I'm sure you slipped out many obvious tells that I can identify later. Next Cycle should be more direct. I think you can have multiple valid suspects, so how you rank them is a minor enough detail that missing explanations for that specifically won't kill us. Don't get me started on missing karking flips again Yes and no - but I don't want to get side-tracked. I would agree with this, yes. 7 minutes ago, Archer said: I usually spend signup week thinking about the fun I could have with the brief. So I often go into games with something in mind that e!me can easily share if I'd like to. As the elim doc of the last MR will show, I'm aware it's good for getting village cred and I'd like to avoid the impression that my creative juices are being occupied by evil strategizing. So don't give me too much cred. :P. >> Et tu, Archer? Slight positive for the dgaf here. But I know you're a guy who plays with meta...why do you do this to me...my heart can't take it 8 minutes ago, Archer said: I dare you to flirt with Albert Keredin is gay which means that sentient drip cups do not qualify for entities he is down to have funtimes oWo with. If this makes him speciesist, he's happy to own the label Hey Albert, are you a drip cup? Because your hotness is overflowing and I caffeine indifference 2
Devotary of Spontaneity Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 7 hours ago, Ashbringer said: It worked to keep people's votes in line. That just turned it into an essentially Vanilla game. The thing is Elims weren't pressured enough to need to lie about their votes, and the village just never found one. Voting in a wider pool (voting 2-3 people in thread) would allow for more pressure on the elims, but also makes it easy for the elims to put teammates in their pool and then vote for someone else. It's unlikely the elims will ever need to lie if voting for any of their candidates counts as honesty. I don't know how important that will be. 3 hours ago, Mailliw73 said: Hey, got busy this afternoon and forgot the game was started so hello there. My initial gut reaction to Archer’s post was that it felt elimmy, but that’s eased up as I kept reading. Here’s my hot take, but I think it’s totally fine to not share your vote in the thread. Am I being pushed this way subconsciously because I don’t like broad decisions about what villagers have to or have to not do? Maybe, idk, but I think there is merit to voting secretly in contrary to your public vote or not mentioning who you are going to vote for in the thread. Especially to reaction test or push on someone a bit more even while actually voting for a higher suspect. I would expect voting to gauge a reaction will be less effective in this game since any vote is even less meaningful than a non-final vote in a regular game. Bandwagoning/trains will be less likely to form from votes that may not be real. 3 hours ago, Archer said: Yes. But the point is you're voting among three suspicions. Or two, I'm fine with that. Let me sketch out the rationale better. Step 1. Everyone puts a placeholder vote on a truly random individual. Odds are this won't matter because the active votes will outweigh the passive ones which are wasted on people there's no momentum built to kill. But this changes the default situation from if I stay quiet, I'll probably survive to if I stay quiet, there's a chance there's going to be a vote on me anyway. Maybe more. The certainty of a large train is required to safeguard yourself. Step 2. People cast broad nets of suspicion. Striker's post is a decent example of this actually. We're all smart enough to see village tells, and if you can't, you might be clouded by the elim mindset and will be interrogated about it tomorrow. So we focus on our suspects so that no one feels fully certain they'll survive the Day. Step 3. We vote for one of our top suspects. Step 4. ...somewhat randomly. It's an allegedly random choice from our pool. Which again reduces the certainty that you can argue your way out of a vote. Unless you can fully persuade someone, the coin might make them fall back on you. The process of creating a suspect list should reduce the amount of votes that land on villagers, but even if they do, it's not an unexpected outcome for C1. It's worth it for the pressure this creates. The whole idea is that everyone is under an equal amount of legitimate pressure and the only effective way of saving yourself is by voting in self-preservation. Villagers don't care about that, but the elims will. How would you tell which votes were likely elim the following day? Multiple people happening to vote on the same person from their suspect pool could be elim coordination or random chance. It would take a while to figure out the difference. 38 minutes ago, StrikerEZ said: The slight good read I have of Devo comes from her being helpful with looking at the past game and trying to call out Archer’s change in stance since then. Granted, that is not necessarily alignment indicative, but it feels like a lot of work for an elim to go through. I did not do a lot of work. I opened QF 52 and looked at the first page. I noted that some of Archer's views were the same and some were different. Writing the RP took maybe 60 times longer.
The Unknown Medallion he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 Forgot who my RP character is honestly. I understand the reasoning behind the votes on me, but it was a joke, like, I didn't even put a vote in (not because I didn't want to, because I'm lazy). Might vote for Illwei, but I don't have many read rn.
Illwei Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 1 hour ago, Archer said: The formality of red text was unnecessary, which is interesting. No point on mine though? I'm kinda iffy on Archer right now. I think the part above this bit i quoted feels off. Don't think Striker's post was especially villagey even though I'm trying to think of how to see that, and it feels like either a pocket attempt or a teammate bit. TUA hasn't been especially villagery, the post above being meh in terms of defence + voting on me. @The Unknown Aon Not many reads I can get. Is there one or two you can share?
StrikerEZ he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 28 minutes ago, Illwei said: Don't think Striker's post was especially villagey even though I'm trying to think of how to see that, and it feels like either a pocket attempt or a teammate bit. The second part of this sentence is confusing me. Please explain what you mean by you’re trying to think of how to see that.
Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 Was going to do a table but Shard keeps eating my formatting so tabs it's going to be. I wanted to take another look at the distribution of views on the voting, to see if there are any clusters or patterns that can be highlighted and players to scrutinise. Secrecy: <Archer, TUA, Ash#2> ∃S ∧ ∃H: <Maili> ∃H ∧ ∃S: <Experience, Ash, Mat #2, Aman, Kas> Honesty: <Illwei, JNV, Striker, Mat> The difference between the two middle categories is very fine-grained. It may be better to collapse them, but given Maili's distinguishing of his views, I think it's worth separating him into a separate category of his own. My personal expectation is that we will see one of two phenomena, either: A. Evil players will cluster in a category due to a shared doc, or B. They will split up across categories. If A is true, then my sense is that the last two categories, through sheer weight of numbers, are more likely to be compromised. (Given my views of Archer at the moment, I don't find it as likely that Secrecy is thoroughly saturated with Elims, though I grant it is at least logically possible.) If B is true, I think our lone category becomes a bit more interesting - possible deliberate separation of position from teammates? I go back and forth about whether the Elims are more likely to be found in Honesty or in the Mixed categories. Again, I feel that Secrecy isn't the most intuitive push for them. I think B is in general the approach I'm going to take: if A is true, and we have Evil players clustered in a category, then looking across the categories should at least identify one Evil player and then allow link analysis to proceed. (At which point I will laugh at myself if I ever lose my mind enough to consent to do link analysis in a SE game...) Maili and @Bort are non-starters for me today, and I think they should be non-starters for any reasonable player so I don't see the difficulty in pointing this out. I have IDed abut three different players within the categories I'd like to hear more from, to expand the scope a bit more: @JNV is probably the player on Honesty most open to a climbdown, and to have had some of the strongest reactions to Archer's Grand C1 Plan. I think this is notable in light of the fact three different players did in fact shift their views (myself, Mat, and Maili), with Ash doing a weird hop across two non-adjacent categories simultaneously. @Experience makes a mingled push for Honesty and Secrecy in response to Archer. It's a bit hedgy/tentative this early on, but mostly reads like a softwalked Archer challenge to me. @The Unknown Aon was noted as throwing in with Archer - what do you agree with, and why so? These are basically my vote pool for this cycle. Striker, Illwei, and Thaid firmly in nulls - so I'm basically indifferent and can be talked into it. I liked Devo's latest post - I'm not sure how far I agree (the more I re-read the thread, the more I think Devo and Mat make a fair point that some of our judgements on whether the plans are great and will or won't work are basically made a priori and the real test will be if these operating assumptions bear out in practice), but I felt it was a reasonable way to play Devil's Advocate, and I'm also aware that both V! and E! Devo will be very hard to distinguish in play, so while functionally she's not in my pool this cycle, I don't have a solid read on her.
Ashbringer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 It's late, I have homework to do, and TBH I don't know if I'm going to wake up in time for rollover. Plus my initial target (who may not or may have been Devotary) has posted satisfactorily. I think I'd be okay exeing Archer here. For one thing, big vote train and has something to do with my own alignment (or my own blindness), but a few other things have somewhat stuck out to me. 5 hours ago, Archer said: grr that's a villagery thing to admit. *When. :P. The formality of red text was unnecessary, which is interesting. This, specifically. Red text is the default, I just didn't use it on my first post because my point was I wanted more than just Devotary to feel slightly poke-voted and because I'm lazy. I don't know why it would be "interesting" that one person (Striker in this case) declares one vote on one target with red text. But in the spirit of my own idea, I do want to pick other options for suspicions/exe candidates. Thaid is one, for being uncharacteristically quiet (which... they haven't been on the Shard in the past 12 hours, so it's not very strong, but still). And TUA, for making a retaliatory vote on Archer for... something he agreed with? I tunnel TUA a lot, so not too much. Besides, I'm voting on Archer, right? Or at least one of Archer-TUA-maaaybe Thaid I do feel there was some intent difference in my concept vs Archer's, but you guys are right in that I can't retrospectively find what it is. So I guess we'll see.
Bort he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 Morning all. I go to bed, no game on. I wake up to three pages, lol. There's something about Striker's posts I don't like. They feel like some of my early elim posts - trying to defend against everything that's been said. I'm also a bit suspicious of things Archer, Ash, and Mat, specifically have said, although if you want specific examples, you'll have to wait until I go through the thread again when more awake. Given my expert skills at picking elims, it probably means they are all village, lol. ********************************************************* The door pushed open to reveal a short, hunched over figure with a resplendent beard, freshly cleaned and groomed. The end of the beard hovered up, about 2 feet off the ground, and moved of it's own volition, seeming to look around the room. After a moment, the mass of chin wig settled back to the floor, falling away from a tiny glowing figure, feminine in appearance, but with long, luxurious hair that looks like it could have came from the beard itself. "Bort, are you sure this is the place? I'm not seeing a lot of beards around." Luna, the Beardspren asked her bonded bearded one. "What?" Bortington looked a bit taken aback by this, peered around intently at the other contestants. "Nonsense, Luna. I see plenty of beards here," he says pointing to people wearing a variety of necklaces. "I just have the best beard!" "Well, of course you do," Luna replied, proudly. After all, his beard was partially her doing, oaths being what they are and all. He approached the nearest person and started talking about beard care products. 1
Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 24 minutes ago, Bort said: Morning all. I go to bed, no game on. I wake up to three pages, lol. *laughs in MR56 veteran* Spoiler 40 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: This, specifically. Red text is the default, I just didn't use it on my first post because my point was I wanted more than just Devotary to feel slightly poke-voted and because I'm lazy. I don't know why it would be "interesting" that one person (Striker in this case) declares one vote on one target with red text. Tbf, Illwei, myself, and JNV are those off the top of my head whom I can remember using red text for our pseudovotes so far. I like it, it's traditional, and it stands out, and I trust that there's nothing quite like seeing their name lit up in red for a player to get a sense of pressure Guess my question would be: what sort of interesting? Because yeah you're right, it's not exactly new given the others who have been doing this. Don't know if this shifts my read though but it's a point I'd at least like addressed. 43 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: I do feel there was some intent difference in my concept vs Archer's, but you guys are right in that I can't retrospectively find what it is. So I guess we'll see. If you ID it, please let us know I'd be interested. I get the sense that you're a bit more H-leaning than Archer is, but I feel that's sort of hairsplitting, so IDK. I'm also not certain it's the most productive level of difference to look at, so I've stopped. 44 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: For one thing, big vote train and has something to do with my own alignment ?
Illwei Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 (edited) I filled my giant new mug with tea and then the tea got cold and it is like ice cold somehow anyways 33 minutes ago, Bort said: Given my expert skills at picking elims, it probably means they are all village, lol. This is a sentence that puts Bort on my watchlist. I like his current suspicions though. Keep that up. 4 hours ago, StrikerEZ said: The second part of this sentence is confusing me. Please explain what you mean by you’re trying to think of how to see that. Trying to see how someone could find that post villagery. Edited March 10, 2022 by Illwei
Ashbringer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 2 minutes ago, Kasimir said: ? Well, if Archer is Elim suddenly I get a lot of interesting looks from people. If Archer is Village... I also suddenly get interesting looks from different people. But Archer being unknown doesn't really help me anyway because Essentially Archer's alignment is tied to mine, somehow. And as a Villager I have both a vested interest in exploring his end of the bond, and in figuring out which side I should be defending myself from Plus it's less likely to fall in the split train problem. Like, say, a vote on Thaid would. 6 minutes ago, Kasimir said: If you ID it, please let us know I'd be interested. I get the sense that you're a bit more H-leaning than Archer is, but I feel that's sort of hairsplitting, so IDK. I'm also not certain it's the most productive level of difference to look at, so I've stopped. Something something Archer's doing it for the randomness? I don't know I'm not IDing it this late ... especially because I've missed what S and H are here. Red-vote-suspicion is more just strange, and on C1 I'll take strange. I'm not making any sense, am I... oh well. Also @Elims: please don't kill Aman early again? He's a good thread bro Also Aman's return has had him die C4, then C3, then C2, then C1, and that pattern is kind of nice but I'd rather it stop
Illwei Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 Why do you consider your alignment tied to Archer's? And why do you think that either way you look worse? Doesn't that imply that you generally look bad, not just related to how Archer flips?
Ashbringer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 1 minute ago, Illwei said: Why do you consider your alignment tied to Archer's? And why do you think that either way you look worse? Doesn't that imply that you generally look bad, not just related to how Archer flips? I don't, really, because from my very Village point of view we came up with the idea independently. But other people seem to think I'm tied to Archer. Mostly Striker, somewhat Kas... maybe Aman? No, not Aman. Aman was quoting Striker, not agreeing with him. I don't know anymore. As for the second part... maybe I've been a little out of it so far. It's been a while since I've really participated in a QF. So I'm a bit all over the place. But I'd also prefer to look bad from an obvious angle than a nebulous one so I have something to bounce off of.
Kasimir he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: Essentially Archer's alignment is tied to mine, somehow. And as a Villager I have both a vested interest in exploring his end of the bond, and in figuring out which side I should be defending myself from How is that supposed to work if you're not even clear on how Archer's alignment is supposed to be tied to yours? 20 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: ... especially because I've missed what S and H are here. Secrecy, Honesty. I just gave the two extreme positions a neat label and went on. Honestly, I was just hoping I could sort of data viz the position clusters and see what jumped out at me, so this was part of the process. 9 minutes ago, Ashbringer said: I don't, really, because from my very Village point of view we came up with the idea independently. But other people seem to think I'm tied to Archer. Mostly Striker, somewhat Kas... maybe Aman? Nope. I pointed out that I don't think you both are actually disagreeing because I noticed it was set-up (or at least that's how I read Aman) as both of you proposing two separate plans but the more I looked at it, despite the apparent disagreements, I think you both actually agree with each other. That doesn't commit me to thinking your alignments are tied, or I'd be tying all the players who agreed with each other in terms of alignment and that's clearly absurd Unless there's something I'm missing out. Which is possible because sleep-deprivation is one hell of a ride. Edited March 10, 2022 by Kasimir formatting
Ashbringer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 6 minutes ago, Kasimir said: Nope. I pointed out that I don't think you both are actually disagreeing because I noticed it was set-up (or at least that's how I read Aman) as both of you proposing two separate plans but the more I looked at it, despite the apparent disagreements, I think you both actually agree with each other. That doesn't commit me to thinking your alignments are tied, or I'd be tying all the players who agreed with each other in terms of alignment and that's clearly absurd I agree Hmm. Again there's that tie of effect vs intent... but I'm beginning to think that's not as big as it seems. Maybe I should just vote to kill Striker for confusing me so much...
Archer he/him Posted March 10, 2022 Posted March 10, 2022 13 hours ago, Amanuensis said: Despite posting this big pseudo-reads list and supporting vote accountability, Striker did not vote To clarify, this was Aman's big bold point that Striker responded to with: 12 hours ago, StrikerEZ said: …I knew I forgot to do something. I was barely able to keep my eyes open as I was doing the second half of that post, so it slipped my mind to actually add a vote. Archer. Going by the theory that elims are more inclined towards conflict de-escalation, this feels like an overreaction from one to protect their standing. My response in their shoes would have been to claim having already put the vote in in secret, did you even read my post? :P. Smh do I have to spell everything out for y'all... Etc Another theory I'm working off of is that elims are less likely to continually change their PM votes and may in fact merely claim to be doing that but they'll save themselves the trouble and just submit something at the end of the round. This felt a bit like someone who got caught out doing that. I'm struggling to believe e!Ash would be so obvious about trying to kill me off so my flip makes him look good because that's... really obviously scummy behaviour. Eh. Realistically, they've replaced TUA in my pool so my d6 will decide.
Recommended Posts