Quick Fix 59: Bachelor--Roshar edition!

[Orlok Tsubodai]

I'm continuing past Archer's first post, and have skimmed the thread, but shortly have a long meeting, and want to break my mental block on posting, so:

Cycle	Post	Player	Summary	Vote	Retractions	Thoughts	AI (perceived)	Notable connections
One	1	Lotus	GM	GM	GM	GM	GM	GM
One	2	Amanuensis	Smiley face in cowboy hat	N/A	N/A	None	None	None
One	3	Thaidakar	RP	N/A	N/A	None	None	None
One	4	Experience	"zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"	N/A	N/A	Don't understand it	None	None
One	5	Araris	IM post	IM	IM	IM	IM	IM
One	6	Matrim	Will be afk for an hour but is present	N/A	N/A	Necessary to say? Why?	Unsure	None
One	7	Ashbringer	Is going to test something. Has placed a stab vote on Devotary, will not retract until analysis or RP done	Devotary	N/A	What are they testing? Stab votes not a new concept. Testing impact of invisibility of retractions? Watch for future votes	Very mild village for willingness to retract on RP	Vote on Devotary
One	8	Archer	Randomness is infuriating as an eliminator - or having a poor sense of whether they're in danger. Suggests everyone keep suspicions broad & trust private, so elims can't rely on village mix to get to D2. Asks for thoughts. Suggests everyone place a truly random vote as a placeholder, will place his on Kas, Matrim, or TUA. Makes bad pun. Says mobile easier as don't need to red text votes.	Kas, Matrim, or TUA	N/A	Thoughts on two levels - tactical, and alignment indicative. From gameplay perspective: random voting likely to create relatively even distribution of votes. Not convinced it increases the threat to the eliminators, as any villager they vote on is just as likely to have pre-existing votes. Random voting within pools short term disadvantageous (in that village cannot coordinate, so random votes within pools truly random, indiciating lower "true" than "threatened" vote) whereas eliminators can do so - and so increase likelihood of killing villager. Over medium term, this provides information - with clouded voting, patterns of voting together suggest coordination, as does being on "winning" vote train each time. Only provides this information if village "random" votes within pools truly random - otherwise can be explained away as "gave three options to obfuscate my vote, but really was more suspicious of player xyz". Is information from coordination worth reduced clarity on player's suspicions? Crux of decision we need to make. At first reading of post, instinct was very strongly against this - personal preference is maximum clear information to assess. Now less certain - intrugued by analysis potential. Alignment indicative? Post made eighteen minutes after thread went live. Suggests time to write it, not necessarily time to consider implications in depth post-start of game. Considered beforehand? I think AI depends on depth of consideration of suggestion. At surface level, random voting aids eliminators - easier to hide, reduced "accessible" information. I went into game expecting to play voting entirely straight - red voting in thread, with consistent vote in my PM. I was planning to do the same if evil - whilst I assessed obfuscated voting beneficial to elims, couldn't see an angle or strong argument against consistency. For Archer to make argument allowing reduced information reads surface level evil, but if so indicates high risk appetite. Overall, depends on depth of thought of consequences (influenced by time of post, pre-consideration, historic gameplay), on short term advantage to elims, and on risk appetite.	Unsure. Mild village. Based on MR56, assess within e!Archer's risk appetite. However, I think post reads as from village mindset. Unwilling to commit strongly. Suggested strategy volatile, potential to significantly advantage elims.	Voting on one of Kas, Matrim, or TUA

[Amanuensis he/him]

11 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

…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.

Like I said, I'd rely on tone reads / logical consistency to determine sincerity. For example, JNV went that route too, but he went that route hard. Elims tend to be less aggressive in scenarios like this, so I agree with your assessment that he's probably Village (might not be depending on elim doc talk - very possible that a partner who'd been following along and posting more had encouraged him to vote Archer when he came in, since a lot of people were susing Archer for it - but imo that's something I'd look into only if you and Illwei are town, which I doubt atm). It's simply more likely that JNV is a Villager overreacting to what he feels is Bad Village Play, and tbh, I can't blame him. I had the same initial reaction that he, Kas, Mat, and others had and I considered going the aggressive route too, yet held back to not sway other players. But then Archer posted more and I thought about it more and I saw how many people were becoming anti-Archer and I walked away with a V!Archer read. Now I'm convinced the elims are banking on this ML today, so anyone who encourages it gets immediate side-eye from me.

I can accept my logic could be wrong, but I'm not going to entertain that possibility until I'm proven wrong with a couple flips. And I do think it's interesting that you're arguing with my logic as a defense for yourself, since it protects Illwei too and basically everyone voting Archer or encouraging his exe. I do think you could be Village. Most players I go for on D1 end up being Village. But I highly doubt that all my suspicions are Village. Especially in a V!Archer world.

11 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

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?

Ah, okay, I get it. But I also don't agree, which leaves me questioning where you're coming from. I've got a little Ash paranoia atm but I think he's a really strange D1 sus. Especially when you yourself have found most of what he's said agreeable + appreciates that he is holding himself accountable. Could you please articulate what it is about Ash that you suspect exactly? And why those positive things you said about him don't push him toward a V!read, like the agreeable things I've said apparently pushed you into V!reading me?

14 hours ago, Amanuensis said:

• I'm always sus of people who v-read me early when I'm a villager. Villagers are more paranoid of me. Elims want to pocket me.

13 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

I would rather not be paranoid of you. You’ve been village the past few games, and the way you’re talking now feels like it did in those games.

12 hours ago, Amanuensis said:

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

12 hours ago, Kasimir said:

Edited to add: @Amanuensis - Got a clearer read off you in LG83, but I think that was partly due to the circumstances of the PM and my revealing my Security Officer status to you earlier. But as I've stated in AG8, I generally default read you Null+ or light Village early on - as with Orlok, I do think you are both too helpful to the Village to not do that, but I am perfectly happy to revise that view based on reads. I didn't ID E!Aman in AG8 via tone - I IDed him because of his reactions to D3 Meerkat, the PM thing that tripped red flags for me, but most importantly, his defense of E!Szeth, who had flipped. So the short answer is that I never get clear reads on you early on but just pragmatically chunk you in the Null+s/Light Village and revise when more voting data (and other forms of data) emerge.

12 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

I barely could tell a difference between Hyena and TJ's MR, feel/tone wise. I haven't noticed anything different but I'd say yeah, your prodding of certain people and points feels about the same. Idk why you felt the need to ping four people to confirm something like that but /shrug  

11 hours ago, Archer said:

Village points for drawing attention to yourself, I guess. 

@Ashbringer didn't respond to it (I don't think) and @Archer didn't really answer my question, but here's where I'm at on your response.

Maybe you understand my Village tone better than others since you were on a team with me in my last elim game and because you just GM'd me in a Village game where my activity was in PMs only, but even so, you do not appear to be experiencing Fog of War like the rest of us. I don't think I've said or done anything that's particularly Villagery - and while I very much appreciate people not being excessively paranoid of me - your reply to me susing you for v!reading me feels like it's TMI justification.

Would appreciate if Archer (who's been an elim against me, so interesting perspective if he's got anything to add on if I'm sounding like I did when I was gunning for him) and Ash (who has advocated me to not get NK'd) weighed in on this too, because I really don't feel like Striker is a Villager in his interactions with me.

Anyone else is welcome to chime in too, those four names were just ones that I figured would have insight based on interactions in those games, and doubled as a way to figure out their alignments in this one.

@Thaidakar the Ghostblood is still MIA so removing him from my voting pool today, despite the fact I think he's probably elim.

Which leaves Striker, Illwei, although everyone can basically assume I'm voting Striker today and looking at Illwei for tomorrow.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Amanuensis

[Archer he/him]

Quote

Thoughts on two levels - tactical, and alignment indicative. From gameplay perspective: random voting likely to create relatively even distribution of votes. Not convinced it increases the threat to the eliminators, as any villager they vote on is just as likely to have pre-existing votes. Random voting within pools short term disadvantageous (in that village cannot coordinate, so random votes within pools truly random, indiciating lower "true" than "threatened" vote) whereas eliminators can do so - and so increase likelihood of killing villager. Over medium term, this provides information - with clouded voting, patterns of voting together suggest coordination, as does being on "winning" vote train each time. Only provides this information if village "random" votes within pools truly random - [1] otherwise can be explained away as "gave three options to obfuscate my vote, but really was more suspicious of player xyz". Is information from coordination worth reduced clarity on player's suspicions? Crux of decision we need to make. At first reading of post, instinct was very strongly against this - personal preference is maximum clear information to assess. Now less certain - intrugued by analysis potential. Alignment indicative? Post made eighteen minutes after thread went live. Suggests time to write it, not necessarily time to consider implications in depth post-start of game. [2] Considered beforehand? I think AI depends on depth of consideration of suggestion. At surface level, random voting aids eliminators - easier to hide, reduced "accessible" information. I went into game expecting to play voting entirely straight - red voting in thread, with consistent vote in my PM. I was planning to do the same if evil - whilst I assessed obfuscated voting beneficial to elims, couldn't see an angle or strong argument against consistency. For Archer to make argument allowing reduced information reads surface level evil, [3] but if so indicates high risk appetite. Overall, depends on depth of thought of consequences (influenced by time of post, pre-consideration, historic gameplay), on short term advantage to elims, and on risk appetite.

Not going to quote a chart because the Shard will laugh at me.

1. This is true, so don't do that :P.

2. how dare you suggest that I don't think things through

3. and have a high risk appetite 

smh evil me would never  /s

Little surprised at the village read after that analysis of it. 

30 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

Would appreciate if Archer (who's been an elim against me, so interesting perspective if he's got anything to add on if I'm sounding like I did when I was gunning for him) and Ash (who has advocated me to not get NK'd) weighed in on this too, because I really don't feel like Striker is a Villager in his interactions with me.

As I alluded to earlier, your votes have been pretty direct. Your playstyle tends to be to provide an avalanche of reasons with your vote instead of being choosey, which I don't mind. But I'm hesitant to give you any credit for acting like you have previously because as much as you claim to be ignorant of your own meta, if people acted really differently when they were evil, this game would be way easier to solve. I'm genuinely confused why you're bringing it up.

[Amanuensis he/him]

1 minute ago, Archer said:

As I alluded to earlier, your votes have been pretty direct. Your playstyle tends to be to provide an avalanche of reasons with your vote instead of being choosey, which I don't mind. But I'm hesitant to give you any credit for acting like you have previously because as much as you claim to be ignorant of your own meta, if people acted really differently when they were evil, this game would be way easier to solve. I'm genuinely confused why you're bringing it up.

This response is exactly why I'm bringing it up  and why I think you're Village and Striker isn't.

Again, this was his response to my susing him for v!reading me early (wasn't explicit before I asked, but his response made it explicit):

14 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

I would rather not be paranoid of you. You’ve been village the past few games, and the way you’re talking now feels like it did in those games.

I'm not convinced a Villager says this. Feels like justification for elim TMI that ignores Village Fog of War.

[Mat he/him]

12 hours ago, Illwei said:

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

I realize this is NAI but I still read it village.

12 hours ago, Archer said:

So don't give me too much cred. :P. 

This is exactly the kind of sentence that makes me want to

11 hours ago, The Unknown Aon said:

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.

Bad vibes from this, particularly the middle paragraph.

8 hours ago, Kasimir said:

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 think it'll probably be less coordinated than you think for the elims either way, like they'll just do whatever they would do regardless. Think about the BT, we didn't strategize on how many bid votes to make collectively, just did whatever we wanted to individually. I imagine this will be similar.

6 hours ago, Bort said:

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.

Starting out with this is a good look for you I think, since while elim in the LG you didn't really do analysis or post thoughts iirc. 

1 hour ago, Orlok Tsubodai said:

Necessary to say?

Why?

The intent of that post was to say that I ship Shallan/Adolin, btw. The last part was added as an afterthought.

My in-thread red-colored vote is on Striker, but other options for me would be Ash or Archer, in that order. Ash I think is much more tied to Striker than to Archer, and in a way that looks e/e to me. I don't think that's preflipping Striker cause the read I'm getting is that Ash's defense seems like he knows Striker's alignment one way or another... it's hard to explain. I want to ISO Ash the most out of everybody right now, it'll hopefully make that more clear to me :P. What I can say is that in all of Ash's recent village games I read him village immediately, and that isn't happening right now. That by itself isn't a reason to vote, imo, but I don't think it's nothing either.

I'm not going to vote Archer nor do I necessarily suspect him but I think his exe would be better than a lot of other people's. You can assume I'm voting Striker today.

7 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

I'm not convinced a Villager says this. Feels like justification for elim TMI that ignores Village Fog of War.

I share your read, but I also want to note that Striker said essentially the same thing that I said and you should be wary of a tunnel  

Edited March 10, 2022 by Matrim's Dice

[Amanuensis he/him]

33 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

I share your read, but I also want to note that Striker said essentially the same thing that I said and you should be wary of a tunnel  

Said essentially the same thing as you, meaning this, right?

13 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

I barely could tell a difference between Hyena and TJ's MR, feel/tone wise. I haven't noticed anything different but I'd say yeah, your prodding of certain people and points feels about the same. Idk why you felt the need to ping four people to confirm something like that but /shrug  

You at least say that my e!Anon play was barely distinguishable from my v!Blackout play, which allows for the possibility I'm elim here. That comment alone gives you more Village Fog of War credence than Striker has. Plus I'm v!reading you for completely unrelated reasons, while I don't have a reason to v!read Striker yet.

Plus it's D1 and we gotta exe someone so, tunnel or not, I'm content ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited March 10, 2022 by Amanuensis

[Illwei]

I don't remember when the cycle ends

Matrim calling me village? More than once? Are we going back to old times? Please say yes, it's nicer than thinking you're trying to pocket me

[Mat he/him]

2 minutes ago, Illwei said:

I don't remember when the cycle ends

Matrim calling me village? More than once? Are we going back to old times? Please say yes, it's nicer than thinking you're trying to pocket me

…11am? I think?

Yes :D. No pocket, promise.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Matrim's Dice

[JNV]

16 hours ago, Archer said:

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. 

 

Ok let me just dissect your plan real quick

1 requires everyone to actually do this and also inactives and also why wold anyone do this and also I dont think ties kill all so this doesnt really create any pressure anyways

2... Isnt this what people do anyway? You say who you are suspicious of and why and who you are voting beause most suspicious

3 is also just what people do except less info so less dialogue and isnt most of the info from the vote gotten by reactions to votes and stuff? When Im in a pool of "oh I might vote on this person" I feel no pressure at all and I dont understand why someone would so maybe thats why Im really really against this plan cause I dont see people feelin threatened in this situation

4. Thats just how people vote. Same point as 2. We say who is suspicious and pick one and hiding who we actually find suspicious just hurts our chances later at clear communication cause everything not founded  on earlier info si suspect and less trustworthy so I think your plan just sabotages us

16 hours ago, Archer said:

When your fun little Bachelor story takes a hard turn into Warbreaker 

(1) Being wrong in an unexpected way is better than being wrong in a predictable way. This is a game of chicken, we win by making the elims flinch. My strategy expands our ability to poke. (2) I've always seen C1 as a freebie mix, although that sometimes doesn't work out in practice. Anyway, your win probably drops off fairly significantly if an unplanned C1 elim teammate death happens. It's much worse to go from 2 to 1, but the first death bumps exlo back from Cycle Five (C1 3:12, C2 3:10, C3 3:8, C4 3:6, C5 3:4) to Cycle Six (C1 3:12, C2 2:11, C3 2:9, C4 2:7, C5 2:5, C6 2:3). Okay, now that I've worked it out, that's not actually that bad, but you have to remember you've got less thread control and inactivity clears (players who couldn't have submitted the NK being removed from the suspect list) are a pain for the elims. In practice, I think two elims are likely to run into trouble over that long a stretch. And most elim teams act accordingly. 

(3) Lying about your vote is inherently suspicious. While it's possible that a low activity elim might use my intial suggestion that people RNG their placeholder votes as an excuse, most people won't be able to because they're visibly engaged. So my proposal asks them to discuss several suspicions and advertise that they'll choose from them. (5) If someone's obviously shoehorning one into their list, feel free to call it out. But at least they'll have to do that and go on the record as considering them as an option. True RNG would be a problem, but this modified version has less opportunities for votes with no groundwork. (6) People will have to say what they're thinking to justify their suspect pool. There's multiple correct answers to who is an elim, so limiting yourself to a single vote is actually less effective. :P. 

(4) I'm trying to decide if this is just a difference opinion thing or not. Saying "so Im voting Archer but if you explain your strategy better maybe I could see merit possibly' doesn't feel natural. 

1 I agree we need elim reactions but like I said above I dont think this spit vote actually makes elims react cause I dont feel threatened at all but I cna see why if you think theyd feel just as threatened you would think your plan works but I cant understand why youd think a "oh I might vote this" is anywere near as threatenning as an actual vote and besides this "pool of votes" is just a way of complicating "here are my suspicions here is my vote here are the people I could move to if my thoughts change" and making it all a lot more confusing for the village

3 again this is just what people do normally and your whole pool thing just messes it all up

5 ok I just think your plan is just saying to go about your business but also try not to tier your suspicions so  your plan is just "do stuff normally but also confuse us" nad I think Ive said this a lot so sorry if Im coming across badly but I just really dont like your plan

6 I mean I was kind of assuming to keep your suspect pool actually accurate youd have to imply all of your suspicions there are about equal so you oculdnt prosecute someone thoroughlyt ror naything so your suspicions are kind of hindered

4 Im voting you because i dont like your strategy cause I have a hard time finding people suspicious for anything and also weird logic sours my opinion of people so if the logic is cleraed up the suspicion goes away a bit I know this is kind of a bad way to think about suspicions but its really the only way I can find people to vote in the first cicle

14 hours ago, Kasimir said:

I am not fully sold on the idea that this generates more pressure than playing it straight, but I've already commented that I think overlapping pools could plausibly increase pressure, so I am willing to give this a shot.

At this point, probably leaning at least null+ on Archer. As I said in MR56, Archer likes his C1 Grand Plans, period, so I don't want to overcredit him for this, but I feel as though while I'm not fully sold on it, I like the train of thought. JNV, interested if this has shifted your thoughts on Archer?

I mean I can kind of understand where the thought process is comning from now but that doesnt relaly help cause I think his thought process is wrong and sure maybe I could think better of them cause I know they arent entirely illogical but I just dont really feel good about them 

8 hours ago, Kasimir said:

• 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.

Hi yes what is a "climbdown" and also what do you want to hear from me whats up hi how are you today may I say you are looking particularly wordy with a nice metaphorical hat

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

I do feel like Striker cares more about how his opinions come across than about being accurate. Way too much of this does come from Striker using pretty much the same phrasing of 'Does that make sense' in this game and as e!Pearl Chameleon in AG8. He also arbitrarily sorted players into tiers early on in that game, which isn't quite the same as what he did this game but still too close. It might not have been a great idea to look into this this way since Striker's recent games have been evil in an AN + evil in the BT, neutral in QF 58 and fake neutral in MR 56, all of which obscure tone in a way that can't be present in this game.

I'm also not sure about Ash. Declaring that he's a villager multiple times strikes me as off, and publicly asking the elims not to kill Aman is reading as coming from someone who can make sure Aman doesn't get killed. Although if Ash is evil I don't think Archer would be after coming up with similar plans, Ash missing an important part of Archer's post, and Ash insisting that he and Archer's alignments were tied.

Spoiler

Temlin sighed and sat down on her bed as soon as Mehdan left. She pulled out her current diary from under the mattress and began to write. Years of doing this left-handed had made her accomplished with writing with a glove on, and detailing her own experiences was still a welcome change after fifteen years of copying the words of others over and over. Using the same code she’d been using since the beginning, she recorded:

Day 155:

I can finally meet with the representative from the Iron Spears today. The group I encountered near the ruins of Rathalas said their leadership is based here and gave me a code phrase to use at the winehouse Taln’s Alms winehouse. They want to see Mehdan but not talk to her. Bringing her along will be easy, talking to someone else without her noticing will be more difficult, even though she can be oblivious when she wants to. She didn’t notice, or else didn’t care, what was happening in our city before she left, and during our travels she didn’t respond to a single subtle hint that trying to marry Adolin was a poor course of action. I want to trust that I could just tell her it was a bad idea sine she’s usually so terrified of overstepping that she’ll do as I ask, but she’s so determined that this is the best way for her to help Kelathar and I can’t risk getting into a fight with her. We passed close enough to Rathalas to see the devastation wrought there, and she still thinks the son of the man who did that will be able to cause positive change in Kelathar. At best nothing will come of it since her parents owe their loyalty to Highprince Ruthar, not Highprince Kholin. At worst it will be war between the princedoms, our city will become a battleground, and countless innocents will die. I doubt the Iron Spears will be able to make much of a difference either, but they do have a reputation for small scale rescue operations and being able to protect individuals from retaliation. If I can secure the safety of any number of people back home, this trip will have been worth it.

Temlin closed her diary and put it back under the mattress, pulling out the pages of her manuscript instead. This one was also in code since the list of people she’d let read it was very short. She had left her heroes in the Bronze Palace about to present their case to the Prime Aqasix. Though she had vivid memories of copying a book of Azish government practices tens of times in a row before Lady Abakal had declared it blasphemous and not suitable for the eyes of good little Vorin girls, Temlin couldn’t recall the details well enough to think of the best way to craft an argument that would convince the Prime. She moved on to the next section of her outlined notes, the one month period after the Prime agreed to support independence movements in Alethkar but before the decision was made into law. Here, Ivanar Ruthar and the elite guard assigned to him would be rallying opposition to the edict while trying to kill the protagonists before they could gather too much support. Temlin didn’t know anything about Ivanar’s personality or even what he looked like, but didn’t care enough to try for accuracy. The power behind him mattered far more than the individual, after all.

 

[Kasimir he/him]

36 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

…11am? I think?

3AM  So one and a half more hours, though really I hope to be asleep before that rather than listening to music.

17 minutes ago, JNV said:

Hi yes what is a "climbdown" and also what do you want to hear from me whats up hi how are you today may I say you are looking particularly wordy with a nice metaphorical hat

Basically I felt of all the players in Honesty, you built the most room for revision in: you explicitly told Archer you were open to re-evaluation or reconsideration. (This is something I didn't see Illwei or Striker doing: they just categorically said no.) So given the people who did re-evaluate on Archer, Aman included, I then wondered about you as the only guy who had made the commitment to revise if possible.

What I wanted to hear was exactly everything else you said: A. you still object, B. your issue with Archer is one of logic, C. your suspicions are based off weird logic.

I like the fact you're adamantly sticking to your guns despite the thread more or less being on board with Archer as I feel an Elim would be more willing to concede, or reduce the conflict, but I'm eh about the "yes this is weird logic and I'm going to vote for weird logic" element. I know a lot of people (myself included) have difficulties finding hard suspicions C1, but eh. Going for weird logic seems like a way of getting off a crapshot. Unsure I guess.

[+Lotus she/her]

One hour and 12 minutes remaining in this cycle

[Ashbringer he/him]

Aman - I can’t really tell if you’re reading similar to your Village games. Didn’t pay strong enough attention in tge LG/BT I guess.

Mat - why do you assume I know Striker’s alignment? Wouldn’t that make me inheritely Evil?

Devo - if I was Evil and wanted Aman to not die, I’d just say so in the doc. Unless you think I’m advocating leniency on a returning player who’s been NK’d repeatedly, for village cred. In that case idk what to say.

[Amanuensis he/him]

10 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

Aman - I can’t really tell if you’re reading similar to your Village games. Didn’t pay strong enough attention in tge LG/BT I guess.

Then why ask the elims to not kill me?

Btw my new voting pool is Archer, Striker. Now that thread opinion has mostly shifted away from E!Archer and that was the main reason I assumed V!Archer, I'm thinking it may be better off to exe him now.

[Orlok Tsubodai]

Cycle	Post	Player	Summary	Vote	Retractions	Thoughts	AI (perceived)	Notable connections
One	1	Lotus	GM	GM	GM	GM	GM	GM
One	2	Amanuensis	Smiley face in cowboy hat	N/A	N/A	None	None	None
One	3	Thaidakar	RP	N/A	N/A	None	None	None
One	4	Experience	"zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"	N/A	N/A	Don't understand it	None	None
One	5	Araris	IM post	IM	IM	IM	IM	IM
One	6	Matrim	Will be afk for an hour but is present	N/A	N/A	Necessary to say? Why?	Unsure	None
One	7	Ashbringer	Is going to test something. Has placed a stab vote on Devotary, will not retract until analysis or RP done	Devotary	N/A	What are they testing? Stab votes not a new concept. Testing impact of invisibility of retractions? Watch for future votes	Very mild village for willingness to retract on RP	Vote on Devotary
One	8	Archer	Randomness is infuriating as an eliminator - or having a poor sense of whether they're in danger. Suggests everyone keep suspicions broad & trust private, so elims can't rely on village mix to get to D2. Asks for thoughts. Suggests everyone place a truly random vote as a placeholder, will place his on Kas, Matrim, or TUA. Makes bad pun. Says mobile easier as don't need to red text votes.	Kas, Matrim, or TUA	N/A	Thoughts on two levels - tactical, and alignment indicative. From gameplay perspective: random voting likely to create relatively even distribution of votes. Not convinced it increases the threat to the eliminators, as any villager they vote on is just as likely to have pre-existing votes. Random voting within pools short term disadvantageous (in that village cannot coordinate, so random votes within pools truly random, indiciating lower "true" than "threatened" vote) whereas eliminators can do so - and so increase likelihood of killing villager. Over medium term, this provides information - with clouded voting, patterns of voting together suggest coordination, as does being on "winning" vote train each time. Only provides this information if village "random" votes within pools truly random - otherwise can be explained away as "gave three options to obfuscate my vote, but really was more suspicious of player xyz". Is information from coordination worth reduced clarity on player's suspicions? Crux of decision we need to make. At first reading of post, instinct was very strongly against this - personal preference is maximum clear information to assess. Now less certain - intrugued by analysis potential. Alignment indicative? Post made eighteen minutes after thread went live. Suggests time to write it, not necessarily time to consider implications in depth post-start of game. Considered beforehand? I think AI depends on depth of consideration of suggestion. At surface level, random voting aids eliminators - easier to hide, reduced "accessible" information. I went into game expecting to play voting entirely straight - red voting in thread, with consistent vote in my PM. I was planning to do the same if evil - whilst I assessed obfuscated voting beneficial to elims, couldn't see an angle or strong argument against consistency. For Archer to make argument allowing reduced information reads surface level evil, but if so indicates high risk appetite. Overall, depends on depth of thought of consequences (influenced by time of post, pre-consideration, historic gameplay), on short term advantage to elims, and on risk appetite.	Unsure. Mild village. Based on MR56, assess within e!Archer's risk appetite. However, I think post reads as from village mindset. Unwilling to commit strongly. Suggested strategy volatile, potential to significantly advantage elims.	Voting on one of Kas, Matrim, or TUA
One	9	Amanuensis	Ships Shallan with Kaladin. Asks Experience what he meant by his post. Emoji expressing thinking about Ashbringer's experiment. Says we're playing an MU certified mountainous game with distribution.	N/A	N/A	Expressing similar thoughts to myself re Experience and Ashbringer, if interpreting "yyyyyyyyy?" and the emoji correctly.	NAI	None
One	10	Experience	Replies to Archer's post suggesting vote randomness. Suggests they might vote randomly between Archer, Archer, and Archer. Explains earlier post as RP character sleeping.	Possibly Archer	N/A	Can't tell if joking about Archer, assuminmg suspicion. Think suspicion is valid take on Archer's post.	Very mild village	Possible vote on Archer
One	11	Kasimir	Votes on Archer. Engages with idea, asks why randomness and private trust lists shouldn't be repeated beyond C1. Asks Aman what a moutainous game is	Archer	N/A	Fair question. Doesn't engage in depth with coordination consequences of obfuscation of votes.	NAI. Consistent with expected initial assessment from Kas.	Votes on Archer
One	12	Devotary	RP. Notes QF52 had the same setup and elim victory, asks Archer whether playing QF52 changed his initial opinion that obfuscated votes favoured the elims	N/A	N/A	Enjoyed the RP. Skimmed QF52, which looks like it had limited PMs. Archer was village in QF52, note that I read them as pretty suspicious on skim of thread until flip. Asking for information on Archer's position, but gives no view of her own	Very mild village	Questions Archer
One	13	Archer	Asks Aman for his distribution guess. Thinks hidden votes benefit elims more than village, so thinks 3/12, but could be convinced of 4/11	N/A	N/A	Aman's distribution guess 3/12, per a google of MU mountainous games. Think 4/11 with mechanically advantaged eliminators is implausible , and obviously so- parity guaranteed after C3. If believes hidden votes benefit elims, why suggest it above - reevaluate depth of thinking. Why suggest implausible distro?	Mild evil	None
One	14	Thaidakar	Misses Archer's awful pun	N/A	N/A	Lucky man	NAI	None
One	15	Devotary	Spells out to Thaidakar Archer's Salamander joke	N/A	N/A	None	NAI	None
One	16	Thaidakar	Thanks Devotary	N/A	N/A	None	NAI	Possible less likely e/e with Devotary
One	17	Experience	Asks whether it benefits the village to keep voting secret, thinks some of out best information could be gained from inconsistencies in voting. Says will probably do that at some point, but it could be useful. Asks for thoughts.	N/A	N/A	Internally inconsistent, evidently so. Gut read of evil. Makes sensible point re playing voting straight - but don't think this is AI. Possible read as making sensible argument, but providing room to manoeuvre. If evil, why so self-evidently evil?	Gut elim, reevaluate. Dislike that read appears so easy.	None
One	18	Ashbringer	We need to strike a balance on anonymous voting. Last time, eventually all votes matched the thread, which made it vanilla. So voting in sectret can be helpful, need to figure out how. Says balance also necessary with random voting. Notes that random voting allows consideration of whether elim votes are truly random, suggests that becomes a three gods problem.	N/A	N/A	Dislike assuming hidden voting useful just because it's in the game. Vanilla isn't necessarily bad, particularly if hidden voting deemed disadvantageous - unless we're explicitly playing suboptimally to use the mechanic. Takes random voting as helpful to start - not sure thoughts on this, worth noting.	Mild evil - dislike willingness to obfuscate information without strong rationale, which Ashbringer doesn't provide	Supports Archer's proposal, doesn't provide depth of thought
One	19	Amanuensis	Explains mountainous games. Doesn't think hidden votes is enough to push game to 4/11. Doesn't like C1 distro guessing. Asks Devo whether Archer was v or e in QF52.	N/A	N/A	Implicit from "pushing to" that sees hidden votes as beneficial to village?	Unsure	None
One	20	Archer	Thinking has shifted since QF52, QF52!Archer inexperienced. Suggests Kas' vote in his elim meta. Randomness C1 but not onward justifiable as C1 a shot in the dark.	N/A	N/A	Understand evaluation of thinking. Dislike handwaving of why. Think Kas is in Kas meta. Strongly dislike all C1 strategies that separate C1 - don't think randomness in C1 voting + elim kill put sus in any stronger a position C2 - and so C1 must be a cycle in which actual discussion occurs.	Mild evil	Kas in elim meta
One	21	Matrim	Replies to Archer, says not knowing others' stances is infuriating to village. Likes Archer's explanation for it just being C1. Thinks we should try for an elim flip today	N/A	N/A	Like mindset thoughts on Archer's suggestion come from	Gut mild village	Disagrees with Archer
One	22	TUA	Placing a retaliatory vote on Archer, agrees with Archer's suggestion	Archer	N/A	Very odd. Self contradictory - if agrees, then why not act following logic - makes single, explicit, non-random vote. Less likely e/e with Archer.	Mild evil	Votes on Archer, agrees with Archer
One	23	Ashbringer	Responds to Archer's C1 randomness. Says we want to avoid everyone C2 claiming C1 vote was random - too easy for elims to hide. Going random and secret to start, but if has reason to trust Devotary, will move it from them. Suggests everyone vote for two players in thread, pick which one is real	Possibly Devotary?	N/A	Very much like two-player suggestion. Allows uncertainty and coordination conclusions whilst forcing reads.	Moderate village	Possible vote on Devotary
One	24	Devotary	Replies to Aman, says Archer was v in QF52. In QF52, Archer supported coloured votes. Whatever village did din't work.	N/A	N/A	Not providing own assessment of Archer, or anyone else.	Unsure	Talks about Archer
One	25	Illwei	If distro balanced, elim team of three. Thinks hidden votes are elim sided. Doesn't like secret votes. Too easy for elims to push players over the line if not discussed.	N/A	N/A	If so, thoughts on those who have argued for secret votes? Agree at gut level with view, however.	Very mild village	None

Likely won't finish this before the end of the cycle, so will swap to being current on thread to make informed vote. Summary up to end of page one is:

Kasimir	NAI	Consistent with expectations
Matrim	Gut mild village	Like mindset assessing Archer
TUA	Mild evil	Self contradictory, actions don't match claimed views
Devotary	Unsure	Like asking for information re Archer, dislike not providing own assessment
JNV	N/A	No posts
Archer	Unsure	Read first post assuming depth of thought, likely influenced by skim of later posts. Do not like post #13. Less likely post #8 came from v!Archer
Experience	Mild evil	Gut, feels like making village post but justifying later changes to approach.
Striker	N/A	No posts
Ashbringer	Moderate village	Based entirely on two-player voting suggestion. Feels very much like a village suggestion.
Mailliw	N/A	No posts
Thaidakar	NAI	Nothing AI to assess
Amanuensis	Unsure	Some shared views, no strong positions explicit
Illwei	Very mild village	Gut based on phrasing of argument on hidden votes
Bort	N/A	No posts
Orlok	N/A	N/A

Edit 1: Posted before I was ready, will edit in thoughts in next five minutes
Edit 2: Thoughts completed

Edited March 10, 2022 by Orlok Tsubodai

[Mat he/him]

11 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

Mat - why do you assume I know Striker’s alignment? Wouldn’t that make me inheritely Evil?

Yes, but if that assumption was strong then I’d be voting you. It’s more of a possibility or a way to read your posts at the end of pg3 (can’t link, on mobile sorry) but it has to do with the way you started pushing Archer a lot more once Striker became a viable option.

[Ashbringer he/him]

1 minute ago, Amanuensis said:

Then why ask the elims to not kill me?

Because for 'entirely' different reasons, you've been the first or second priority Elim kill the past three games. That's... annoying.

[The Unknown Medallion he/him]

The main reason I agree with Archer, is because I, on principle, disagree with making an anon vote game into a vanilla with extra steps. At the same time however, we need accountability and we need thoughts of other people to bounce off of. 

[Kasimir he/him]

Just now, Matrim's Dice said:

Yes, but if that assumption was strong then I’d be voting you. It’s more of a possibility or a way to read your posts at the end of pg3 (can’t link, on mobile sorry) but it has to do with the way you started pushing Archer a lot more once Striker became a viable option.

It's where I am a bit conflicted, yeah. There's the whole reason of voting for Archer which is that Archer is tied to him, but it doesn't really show up except...off Striker, I believe. It felt a bit like train fishing, but if it is train fishing, that's...one hell of a way to do it.

My vote analyst self always feels (!) about the circumstances but that inherently depends off a Striker flip or an Archer flip - I'm more down for the former than the latter.

[Experience he/him]

So umm.

Gotta love when the school gets a bomb threat so you don't have access to the shard until like half an hour before rollover. (don't worry everyone's fine)

Anywho.

I...honestly might just not end up voting on someone, it depends if I have time to catch up on the thread before rollover.

[Mat he/him]

2 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

It's where I am a bit conflicted, yeah. There's the whole reason of voting for Archer which is that Archer is tied to him, but it doesn't really show up except...off Striker, I believe. It felt a bit like train fishing, but if it is train fishing, that's...one hell of a way to do it.

My vote analyst self always feels (!) about the circumstances but that inherently depends off a Striker flip or an Archer flip - I'm more down for the former than the latter.

I assume one of these Archers is Ash

But yeah, I don’t want to vote Ash over Striker because e!Striker -> e!Ash much more than vice versa imo (even if it’s not a strong connection it’s stronger than the other way). I don’t consider my point on Ash as preflipping Striker since e!Ash could conceivably do the same thing in the case of v!Striker (or. You know. v!Ash.) And since I suspect Striker outside of this entirely I wasn’t ever considering moving my vote. If Striker does flip elim I’ll look at Ash more but it’s certainly not a situation where I snap vote.

[StrikerEZ he/him]

Well, I sure missed a lot while I slept and observed my old high school band rehearse. 

I'm probably gonna die and don't really have the time to do a super detailed response to more of the accusations against me. For what it's worth, I was responding to those more because it felt easier with my limited time to respond to things directed at me.

@Kasimir @Matrim's Dice @Devotary of Spontaneity @Archer @Experience @Ashbringer @Mailliw73 @Amanuensis @Bort @Orlok Tsubodai Any of y'all willing to switch your votes off of me/vote for Archer with me? Oh and Devo, I think my current playstyle is just so heavily influenced by the games I've played lately. The MR hardly even counted as a village game because I was faking being a neutral. The last time I was a villager before now was August last year. XD And man I understand how Mat felt D1 of the last MR...>>

Oh, and Aman, my current village read of you is from a combination of seeing you in the MR and my LG in PMs, since you didn't post much in my game. Maybe I'm just too used to thinking of you as village in a GM way, since I GM'd you, but I'm still reading you as village.

Oh as I'm typing this, Aman has said he might vote Archer...Aman, pretty please? It'd be nice to survive 2 games in a row (which has literally only happened to me once, ever)

Also, I definitely thought this cycle ended at noon my time, so like 15 minutes ago, which would've been bad for me, but then I saw people still posting and got very confused. Glad to know I just did my timezone conversions wrong.

Experience are you okay? I know you said you are physically fine, but like...mentally?

[Kasimir he/him]

Just now, Matrim's Dice said:

I assume one of these Archers is Ash

But yeah, I don’t want to vote Ash over Striker because e!Striker -> e!Ash much more than vice versa imo (even if it’s not a strong connection it’s stronger than the other way). I don’t consider my point on Ash as preflipping Striker since e!Ash could conceivably do the same thing in the case of v!Striker (or. You know. v!Ash.) And since I suspect Striker outside of this entirely I wasn’t ever considering moving my vote. If Striker does flip elim I’ll look at Ash more but it’s certainly not a situation where I snap vote.

>>

You assume correctly, sigh >> Second Archer was supposed to be Ash but it's 2AM and insomnia is one hell of a drug.

I sense side-train logic at work again, but yes, I do read the logical direction of implication being stronger from Striker to Ash and wouldn't countenance going in the opposite direction. As far as I'm currently concerned, I'm satisfied with my vote but am both open to and interested in persuasion.

[Experience he/him]

9 minutes ago, StrikerEZ said:

Experience are you okay? I know you said you are physically fine, but like...mentally?

Yeah I'm chilling. It was all clear so it's all good.

[Amanuensis he/him]

37 minutes ago, Orlok Tsubodai said:

Amanuensis: Ships Shallan with Kaladin.

Just want to clarify I ship Shallan with Therapy, not Kaladin. I ship Adolin with Kaladin.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Amanuensis