LG113: Day 1: Freedom of Speech

[Illwei]

I asked, they are allowed. He said he would regret it. but that they are allowed. 

Don't forget he asked people to ping him in PMs rather than thread. 

[Mystfall He/Him]

1 minute ago, Illwei said:

I asked, they are allowed. He said he would regret it. but that they are allowed. 

Don't forget he asked people to ping him in PMs rather than thread. 

I am definitely making one then. Just need to decide who to put in it

[|TJ| he/him]

Friendly reminder that you have an IM available to you at all times! Please reach out to me if you feel uncomfortable with anything that's being said at any point in the game! Essentially, you can ping or PM me for any possible reason you can think of, except anything related to the game rules. That's Jo's job :P. 

Happy hunting!

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

4 minutes ago, Mystfall said:

Ksauce? I’ve never thought of him as Kaladin before

Yeah KSauce

3 minutes ago, Illwei said:

I asked, they are allowed. He said he would regret it. but that they are allowed. 

Don't forget he asked people to ping him in PMs rather than thread. 

I did ping him in a PM but thought one of you might know

[WhimsyIsTheBestShard]

1 minute ago, Mystfall said:

I am definitely making one then. Just need to decide who to put in it

Ooh, pick me!

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

Just now, |TJ| said:

Friendly reminder that you have an IM available to you at all times! Please reach out to me if you feel uncomfortable with anything that's being said at any point in the game! Essentially, you can ping or PM me for any possible reason you can think of, except anything related to the game rules. That's Jo's job :P. 

Happy hunting!

Aren’t you canonically evil though

2 minutes ago, Mystfall said:

I am definitely making one then. Just need to decide who to put in it

No one in my spy network please double agents are strictly prohibited 

[Mystfall He/Him]

Just now, Hoid Slayer said:

Aren’t you canonically evil though

No one in my spy network please double agents are strictly prohibited 

Well unless you want to tell me who’s in your spy network, there’s not much I can do about that, can I?

[WhimsyIsTheBestShard]

4 minutes ago, Illwei said:

I asked, they are allowed. He said he would regret it. but that they are allowed. 

Don't forget he asked people to ping him in PMs rather than thread. 

I am absolutely going to use that to conspire against a single person 

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

Just now, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

I am absolutely going to use that to conspire against a single person 

That’s brutal

1 minute ago, Mystfall said:

Well unless you want to tell me who’s in your spy network, there’s not much I can do about that, can I?

Well, you’ll have to figure out for yourself, cause I ain’t tellin’ *crosses arms menacingly*

[Mat he/him]

17 minutes ago, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

Lord Falwin looks at the old man. He... Is openly saying we should depose the queen. "Does anyone know why he is here?"

He outright admitted that as elim he would push for deposition and then "saves it" by saying he wouldn't push for increasing loyalty when that actually seems like an elim thing to do. You wouldn't just say, we should depose the queen! You would have some sort of "would an elim really do this though?"

Did that come off too aggressive?

My problem with this is that I don't think it's that easy. I agree that it'd be better not to vote to depose but I think there is enough grey area to at least allow the possibility that TUC just believes otherwise as a villager. At least, I don't think it's fair to say that it's objectively bad therefore whoever wants to is evil. e!TUC is smarter than that.

13 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Does anyone have any thoughts to add on to this? To counter to this? 

I'd just be interested in your reads on the people in the "off-the-table" group, even if you won't vote anyone new/returning you can still have reads on them

[WhimsyIsTheBestShard]

 

1 minute ago, Mat said:

My problem with this is that I don't think it's that easy. I agree that it'd be better not to vote to depose but I think there is enough grey area to at least allow the possibility that TUC just believes otherwise as a villager. At least, I don't think it's fair to say that it's objectively bad therefore whoever wants to is evil. e!TUC is smarter than that.

I'd just be interested in your reads on the people in the "off-the-table" group, even if you won't vote anyone new/returning you can still have reads on them

Yeah, just my C1 read

[Illwei]

Also @KeyFox 

What made you want to join the game? Have you had previous social deduction game experience? 

@WhimsyIsTheBestShard

I think that him commenting he would do it as an Elim is really not an important point to think about- I don't think it's AI either way in any situation with a lack of context. Defenses aren't my favorite thing but they're not really important. 

I never truly responded to TUC though so I will now on the deposition. 

Quote

1. It gives us an idea of where we're at. It lets village loyalty manipulators know who they need to help. It might seem like it gives the elims a list of who to target, but tbh everyone's a good target to decrease loyalty for one reason or another. We have more village loyalty manipulations than the elims do. 

Specifically to this part. 

We have more Villagers than Elims. To say that we have more loyalty manipulations is potentially true, but is also not. Most of the manipulation roles /decrease/ loyalty. Not Increase. There are some that do, but those also have a second effect that may not be good. 

Speaking of, don't waste loyalty on me. I will probably not make it to the later game, and using loyalty boosts if people have them is not necessarily a good Idea if it's not spread out. Targeting potential Elims is perhaps a better option- but it's a discussion. A discussion that once again TUC proposed and is not leading. AAAAA. But yeah. Also the existence of the vote manip role, if in the hands of an Elim could negate whatever loyalty we had, if stacked, and then it would be useless. So yeah. If you have loyalty giving abilities, spread them out. 

Quote

2. It sets a baseline. Started with losing loyalty or even close to losing loyalty would be like starting with only one elim. It's way too swingy and you can't start with one alignment that close to their win con. Then, when someone inevitably triggers it again, we can know who has been fudging their loyalty over time. 

I do think that this is reasonable to a degree.

It tells us where we stand and how far we might be allowed to go. But then again - I think it opens up two potential paths of play. One where we all update thread with our loyalty and our intentions to raise or lower, or where we don't. The world in which we don't tell thread anything is a world where a baseline is not needed, since lack of coordination means that we would be losing out on needing a baseline at all. 10 people might say "its ok if i go down, since we were plenty ahead!" Combine that with potential Elim Loyalty lowering and we lose.  

Quote

3. It encourages villagers to not play with low loyalties and makes it harder for elims to use that as an excuse. If I'm explicitly going to depose, you can't use your action to make yourself lose loyalty. In fact, now all of you need to increase your loyalty with your action (unless you're already at +2 or -2) so that you can't be subtracted into a negative vote by an elim. 

This kind of comment, as mentioned by people before, opens a whole can of worms around best play practices and enforcing them or not. 

Spoiler

There's a question I suppose of if this is seen as some sort of threat. "Raise your loyalty or we will lose because I will start a deposition." previously this has been seen as improper here, so that's a question. It is of course anyone's choice to start a deposition, but if this is your reasoning I would disagree based on "Best Play Practices" that have been enforced in the past by players in order to maintain a fun game. 

I hate talking like this so I don't know why I am.

As I said before, it is in village's best interest to keep loyalty high, or neutral at the least. And in the best interest to not stack all loyalty onto one player. 

 

Anyways I think I rambled enough for one post, again. 

[WhimsyIsTheBestShard]

I do think my main point is that this now allows an elim to depose without looking as suspicious.

I was trying to merge replies @Mat

Edited 11 hours ago by WhimsyIsTheBestShard

[Mat he/him]

1 minute ago, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

I do think my main point is that this now allows an elim to depose without looking as suspicious.

I was trying to merge replies @Mat

But he specifically said that anyone trying to depose after N1 is elim. This isn't a permanent thing, it's just for the first turn. I don't see how it allows the elims any wiggle room down the road in this regard.

[TwinStorm He/Him]

1 hour ago, Mat said:

Alright fine (I was already writing this before you guys asked lol):

• First two posts of the cycle give me elim-trying-to-look-active-and-good vibes
• In general I think that trying to attribute certain roles to the elim team doesn't work and can get dangerous, so I'd give slight negative points there. It's a good way to do analysis that doesn't actually help, but looks impressive.
• Lightly supported e!Myst to me in PMs in a very noncommittal sort of way (like, no sign of that in the thread)

Basically just C1 vibes and I didn't even vote you so idk why it got such a strong reaction.

Also, should I call you Twin or Storm?

TwinStorm/KeyFox e/e, the game is solved (kidding)

Hi

What are your thoughts on the game?

oh Im not mad or anything, I was just curious and I like when people give reasoning, it makes going back to research/anaylze later easier when we have a process

you asked me for my opinion on Myst, so I gave you my vibe readings, I haven't given any reads yet in thread, because I haven't had time to see any reads worth posting : P 

most folks call me Storm, it doesn't matter tho

20 minutes ago, Illwei said:

 

Twin Is a mild Elim lean in the first place from their first post. They come back to not really give any thoughts anyways, but the first post is a standard "I will be back, but I'm here so see I'm paying attention and care about the game!" kinda post. Not AI always but I do have a watch on them atm. 

bear in mind my first post was at 2 AM and id just opened the Shard to check my alignment : P 

[Illwei]

Just now, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

I do think my main point is that this now allows an elim to depose without looking as suspicious.

I was trying to merge replies @Mat

I think it's notable then to remember that TUC himself has said he doesn't advocate for a deposition outside of D1. And thinks that anyone who tries, should the deposition failed, should be executed or killed by the highguard. (not his words but his sentiment)

The idea is that a D1 deposition would not have an immediate negative consequence, with there being no reasonable way that negative loyalty would outnumber positive today. 

[WhimsyIsTheBestShard]

Honestly, at this point my a suspicion is more light and I more so think it's a bad idea than suspicious now

Ok, maybe I was just wrong ig

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

6 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Also @KeyFox 

What made you want to join the game? Have you had previous social deduction game experience? 

@WhimsyIsTheBestShard

I think that him commenting he would do it as an Elim is really not an important point to think about- I don't think it's AI either way in any situation with a lack of context. Defenses aren't my favorite thing but they're not really important. 

I never truly responded to TUC though so I will now on the deposition. 

Specifically to this part. 

We have more Villagers than Elims. To say that we have more loyalty manipulations is potentially true, but is also not. Most of the manipulation roles /decrease/ loyalty. Not Increase. There are some that do, but those also have a second effect that may not be good. 

Speaking of, don't waste loyalty on me. I will probably not make it to the later game, and using loyalty boosts if people have them is not necessarily a good Idea if it's not spread out. Targeting potential Elims is perhaps a better option- but it's a discussion. A discussion that once again TUC proposed and is not leading. AAAAA. But yeah. Also the existence of the vote manip role, if in the hands of an Elim could negate whatever loyalty we had, if stacked, and then it would be useless. So yeah. If you have loyalty giving abilities, spread them out. 

I do think that this is reasonable to a degree.

It tells us where we stand and how far we might be allowed to go. But then again - I think it opens up two potential paths of play. One where we all update thread with our loyalty and our intentions to raise or lower, or where we don't. The world in which we don't tell thread anything is a world where a baseline is not needed, since lack of coordination means that we would be losing out on needing a baseline at all. 10 people might say "its ok if i go down, since we were plenty ahead!" Combine that with potential Elim Loyalty lowering and we lose.  

This kind of comment, as mentioned by people before, opens a whole can of worms around best play practices and enforcing them or not. 

  Reveal hidden contents

There's a question I suppose of if this is seen as some sort of threat. "Raise your loyalty or we will lose because I will start a deposition." previously this has been seen as improper here, so that's a question. It is of course anyone's choice to start a deposition, but if this is your reasoning I would disagree based on "Best Play Practices" that have been enforced in the past by players in order to maintain a fun game. 

I hate talking like this so I don't know why I am.

As I said before, it is in village's best interest to keep loyalty high, or neutral at the least. And in the best interest to not stack all loyalty onto one player. 

 

Anyways I think I rambled enough for one post, again. 

Illwei do you wanna join my secret spy network?

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

11 minutes ago, Hoid Slayer said:

Aren’t you canonically evil though

TJ is cannonically dead. He was too Loyal to be corrupted, so Odium's forces killed him and took his place.

 

Group PM’s are, unfortunately, open until there are no Parliamentarians.

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

5 minutes ago, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

I do think my main point is that this now allows an elim to depose without looking as suspicious.

I was trying to merge replies @Mat

Trust me it would look suspicious 

[Mat he/him]

5 minutes ago, Illwei said:

The world in which we don't tell thread anything is a world where a baseline is not needed, since lack of coordination means that we would be losing out on needing a baseline at all. 10 people might say "its ok if i go down, since we were plenty ahead!" Combine that with potential Elim Loyalty lowering and we lose.  

This is a really good point. Anyone (TUC) who is considering voting to depose should think about this. Based on the thread consensus I really don't think we plan to info-share about loyalty all that much, so I would say the baseline isn't needed.

[Hoid Slayer He/Him]

4 minutes ago, TwinStorm said:

most folks call me Storm, it doesn't matter tho

They… they do? 

4 minutes ago, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

Honestly, at this point my a suspicion is more light and I more so think it's a bad idea than suspicious now

Ok, maybe I was just wrong ig

No one said you were wrong we just disagree

You might be proven right

Don’t feel bad about it

1 minute ago, Mat said:

This is a really good point. Anyone (TUC) who is considering voting to depose should think about this. Based on the thread consensus I really don't think we plan to info-share about loyalty all that much, so I would say the baseline isn't needed.

I don’t fully understand what y’all are saying but it sounds sensible so it’s alright

[Mat he/him]

3 minutes ago, Hoid Slayer said:

I don’t fully understand what y’all are saying but it sounds sensible so it’s alright

Basically, if we don't plan on tracking the loyalty past C1, there's not as much of a point to getting a baseline.

[TwinStorm He/Him]

9 minutes ago, Hoid Slayer said:

They… they do? 

No one said you were wrong we just disagree

You might be proven right

Don’t feel bad about it

I don’t fully understand what y’all are saying but it sounds sensible so it’s alright

not as much in this corner of the Shard but in other places yeah

[The Unknown Character he/him]

1 hour ago, Hoid Slayer said:

That's true Illwei just lowkey claimed to us

Unless there's mind games involved here

Also, side note

Is this another of your puns?

Ha

Ha

Ha

Actually hot dang

That's crazy I've only been PMed by like four people

Didn't do any PMs myself this game, I don't know why just didn't really feel like it

Yes, Illwei's name is so fun to pun

E!wei, Vilwei, Lilwei, Wei Sports, Chillwei, etc

1 hour ago, Illwei said:

Who is this? Illwei circa 2023??

Me? Mind Games? 

Doesn't sound like something Councilor #6 was raised to do

Sounds like Illwei circa now tbh

55 minutes ago, Illwei said:

An Exercise of if you will - 

What do you think that an Elim could gain by posting this? 

What do you think a Villager could gain by voting this? 

 

Ooga booga I SE player no need fancy ideas I vil read high active players and murder everyone else

42 minutes ago, WhimsyIsTheBestShard said:

TUC

Rude

11 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Also @KeyFox 

What made you want to join the game? Have you had previous social deduction game experience? 

@WhimsyIsTheBestShard

I think that him commenting he would do it as an Elim is really not an important point to think about- I don't think it's AI either way in any situation with a lack of context. Defenses aren't my favorite thing but they're not really important. 

I never truly responded to TUC though so I will now on the deposition. 

Specifically to this part. 

We have more Villagers than Elims. To say that we have more loyalty manipulations is potentially true, but is also not. Most of the manipulation roles /decrease/ loyalty. Not Increase. There are some that do, but those also have a second effect that may not be good. 

Speaking of, don't waste loyalty on me. I will probably not make it to the later game, and using loyalty boosts if people have them is not necessarily a good Idea if it's not spread out. Targeting potential Elims is perhaps a better option- but it's a discussion. A discussion that once again TUC proposed and is not leading. AAAAA. But yeah. Also the existence of the vote manip role, if in the hands of an Elim could negate whatever loyalty we had, if stacked, and then it would be useless. So yeah. If you have loyalty giving abilities, spread them out. 

I do think that this is reasonable to a degree.

It tells us where we stand and how far we might be allowed to go. But then again - I think it opens up two potential paths of play. One where we all update thread with our loyalty and our intentions to raise or lower, or where we don't. The world in which we don't tell thread anything is a world where a baseline is not needed, since lack of coordination means that we would be losing out on needing a baseline at all. 10 people might say "its ok if i go down, since we were plenty ahead!" Combine that with potential Elim Loyalty lowering and we lose.  

This kind of comment, as mentioned by people before, opens a whole can of worms around best play practices and enforcing them or not. 

  Hide contents

There's a question I suppose of if this is seen as some sort of threat. "Raise your loyalty or we will lose because I will start a deposition." previously this has been seen as improper here, so that's a question. It is of course anyone's choice to start a deposition, but if this is your reasoning I would disagree based on "Best Play Practices" that have been enforced in the past by players in order to maintain a fun game. 

I hate talking like this so I don't know why I am.

As I said before, it is in village's best interest to keep loyalty high, or neutral at the least. And in the best interest to not stack all loyalty onto one player. 

 

Anyways I think I rambled enough for one post, again. 

Bold: I think the roles more or less balance out, maybe slightly in the villagers favor maybe just straight even, but every villager can change their own loyalty. This means we win on action economy imo

Italics: This is a good argument. I disagree, but it's definitely valid. If the above (response to bold) wasn't true, I would think the info is probably better off hidden. Generally though, public info is better for the village than private info. The elims already know more about loyalty amounts than we do, and they can learn even more through PMs, might as well even the playing field.

Underlined: This is true, and normally I'd be anti this sort of argument, but I think this is different. This is me saying "don't play against your wincon just for a powerful role." The elims will take advantage of that, but I have the power to head it off, so I will.