Mid-Range Game 9: The Steel Ministry

[nicocoberru she/her]

Coco had dream, a goal, when she arrived at Luthadel. Became an Inquisitor, climb to a high position, elevate her house's position. It seemed easy enough and, when she descended down the caves, she almost had it within her grasp. Almost.

"How dare they do this?" Coco whispered to herself as she glare at the offensive stone that blocks their way out. "They are Skaa. Nothing but Skaa. When will their slow minds realize that?"

No one answered, she doubt they heard her. There were a lot of them, her fellow Inquisitors-to-be. All of them strangers to her. Someone had lit a candle but it had done nothing to chase away the darkness. Instead it enhanced it, the shadows on the walls and in everyone's faces making their situation look even more grim.

Coco stood in one corner, watching the whole crowd. Everyone had been silent for a for some time before one spoke and, after him, more followed. A few accusations flew, and one even gave out a small speech complete with numbers and statistics. How he came up with those figures, she'll never know, but everyone seems more certain of what they were doing, a feeling that she doesn't share.

Still. She was a noble. An allomancer. One of The Lord Ruler's people and she would rather suffer in the Pits of Hathsin then let some poor, flea-ridden, dirty skaa trample on her pride.

I am also not fond of Day 1 lynches due to the same reasons. But I do have to agree that the discussion it generates is important. At the very least it will get people talking.

Oh and, we have a huge storm in here. If I don't login for a few days it's probably due to power outage. Pretty sure it's not gonna happen but I don't want to be killed due to inactivity *coughcontributioncrusadecough*

Edited October 19, 2015 by nicocoberru

[Sart he/him]

 

@Sart [again]: I fail to understand your logic in your second post. Just because you put a player’s name in red doesn’t mean they’re suddenly going to be aware of the thread. It’s still very early in this cycle and unless you know more about Meandbooks than I do, they could very likely be in a timezone far away and still asleep or preoccupied with work at the moment. As such, I think this poke vote makes the least sense of all. If you are going to poke anyone in order to get them to talk, how about you target the players like Orlok or Clanky, who I have caught viewing this thread several times but still haven’t said anything?

 

A difference in time-zones is the main reason for a poke-vote. I can't be in this game 24-7, so I have no way of knowing if they looked at the thread when I wasn't around. I have no way of knowing if they actually care about this game. A poke-vote strongly encourages them to post to the thread, which is concrete evidence that they are paying attention. It's not about the Contribution Crusade. I'm trying to invite new members into the community. We have a stable group of regulars, but I want to see our section of the forum continue to grow. A new book just came out, so it makes sense that we're getting more activity. I just want to make sure that activity lasts. If that means voting for them, then I'll do it.

[Wyrmhero he/him]

@Wyrm: To clarify, burning tin will only tell the user one random player who visited them, so there is no guarantee that even that would give us a solid lead, as it’s possible the person he sees is the lurcher who saved him. That makes me wonder, Gamma; if a lurcher saves someone, who do you tell? Both players? Only the Lurcher? Only the target? Is it announced in the following write-up?

 

Oof, good point. I'd forgotten that it wouldn't even guarantee them seeing their attempted murderer (not that I was banking on it being useful anyway, considering the number of events that have to line up for it to succeed, it was mostly to show how impossible it would be to get proof).

 

For what it's worth, since we are having the old debate. Let's assume 5 skaa for the purposes of easy numbers, and entirely random lynches. If we lynch someone today, we have a 5/26 or 19.2%, as Creccio has said before. If we lynch no-one and the skaa kill succeeds, we have 25 players, and it becomes 5/25, or 20%. Why are people arguing for a 0.8% flat increase to our chances? That is effectively what it is. What does the skaa kill tell us other than 'experienced player X is not a skaa', since that is usually what happens?

 

Kipper, are we going to be at each others' throats again? . You say I call people out for not discussion, and that it would not provoke discussion, but what is this if not a discussion? I voted for Venture Mistborn because he said that he would wait for people to say things, which is basically a pointless post, and ignores the fact that discussion has to start somewhere. I wanted to draw him out and provoke discussion from him. What else could make him say something than someone accusing him, after all?

 

What this has told me is two things: Firstly, you're willing to vote for someone despite not advocating first day lynches (I admit, there may be good reason for that, though I find it interesting), and secondly, you jumped to Venture Mistborn's defence. It might mean nothing, this is true, but evidence like this is what is required if we are to get anywhere.

 

Edit: For what it's worth, and I probably should have said it before the game started - I am now working, so don't expect me to be anywhere near as active as I usually am (no longer loafing around at home all day at university ), and due to work, will not be around on Wednesday. Hooray for staying at work until Midnight...

Edited October 19, 2015 by Wyrmhero

[Orlok Tsubodai]

My views on day 1 lynches are probably already known to those of you who have played with me before; I was rather outspoken in MR8.

Let's look at the two potential outcomes of day 1, in a game without PMs.

1) We decide not to have a day 1 lynch. Little discussion occurs - why would it - there is no evidence to lynch anyone on, no allegations that can hold water, and so people do not engage. During the night, someone is killed by the eliminators. Day 2 comes round. We again have no information - we were unable to glean anything from the eliminator kill, as there is no discussion to base inferences off. We again face the same situation as day one, in which we have no information on which to base the lynch, except that we are an additional villager down.

2) We have a lynch discussion, force players to defend themselves, and have the opportunity to see patterns and differences in play styles, for those players who have played before.

In addition to the information we glean from this, we stimulate discussion, again, forcing exposure to the thread, and force the eliminators to play reactively - picking a target to make us believe something - and even if we are wrong in our deductions, it allows us to build up evidence as to how the eliminators are playing. The alternative is that they pick someone irrelevant to the discussion, and therefore having the discussion keeps our active players alive.

The disparity in information held or obtainable by the village in scenario B dramatically outweighs that of scenario A. This is, in my mind, absolutely worth the small risk of hitting a player with a valuable role.

Now, in terms of voting. Wyrm, your vote on Venture does indeed seem rather uncalled for. In both MR6 and MR8, Venture did not so much as post until after the first cycle had ended. In QF9 and 10, whilst he posted, he did not do so until a large amount of discussion had occurred. In all these games, he was a villager. Whilst his behaviour in posting so early is unusual, and I shall follow him with interest, he is very definitely a reactive player, and voting on him based on an unchanging characteristic seems slightly wrong.

Edit: removing typos, and replacing A and B with 1 and 2 - B with ) is apparently an emoticon.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Orlok

[Amanuensis he/him]

Speaking of a difference in time zones, I am about to go to bed myself [though I have an alarm set for 5 hours from now so that I can begin downloading Tales of Zestiria, since that’s when it will be officially released on Steam - yay].

 

Before I go I will be removing my vote off of Orlok. I noticed that you had been browsing several old games and was curious to see the reason why. I’m guessing from your post that you were analyzing Venture’s past playstyle.

 

Within the last hour I have witnessed several other players view this thread without posting, as well as one who has yet to wander over here but is viewing the community index [whatever that is exactly]. Their names are as follows: Clanky, Araris and Alfa; The Honey Badger. These are just those I have noticed, and it is possible that I have missed others. If those who will be active across the next 8 hours can reel in their attention, in addition to anyone else who appears before my return, I would appreciate it greatly.

 

Alfa, I see you bouncing around forums a lot, though you still haven’t said anything. Do you have a reason why? What are your thoughts on the subjects being discussed so far? I don’t think you’re evil, I just want everyone to participate, and of everyone I named you seem the most active given how many threads you’ve looked recently.

 

 

EDITED FOR COLOR

Edited October 20, 2015 by Adavantos

[Zephrer he/him]

The unease that filled the cavern was contagious. Two Inquisitors had been murdered. Murdered!

How was that even possible?

Serech looked suspiciously at each of the individuals. "None of these fools have what it takes to join the inquisition. Half of these incompetents would faint at the thought of blood, let alone the sight of it." He muttered to himself.

His thoughts turned to the murders, and the implication of the Skaa.

"how could they do this?!" Serech raged, "The Bloody Skaa need to learn their place!"

The caverns would run scarlet with Skaa blood. No matter how they tried to hide, he would find them.

After all, that is the inquisitions job, isn't it?

Well, I don't see much to say that hasn't already been said... But I'll add my opinion. The chances of killing a Skaa are low since we don't have any information that might implicate someone, and we risk killing one of our own.

That being said, we can learn a great deal from a lynch first cycle. We can play it safe and not kill anyone, but we run the risk of missing valuable information.

I think it's worth the risk. But I'll refrain from voting until I either have a good suspect for this cycle or someone can convince me that the risk is too great.

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

@Joe: I take it you support a day one lynch then, Joe? [based on you’re last statement of ensuring a lynch].  If so, could you explain to me why?

There are no Cop roles. There are No PM's. The eliminators have no reason to kill anyone except to win the game. (That sounds weird, but I mean they don't need to kill a specific person because they're a certain thing or know something). Eliminator kills will tell us nothing. So if we wait until day 2 to lynch, we'll be in the same spot. Still no info. Lynching is literally the only way to gather information in this game. (Unless, like wyrm said, a Tin misting gets lucky.)

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Alv, did the PoJ come true from your end?

Edited October 20, 2015 by Mailliw73

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

Remind me what the PoJ is?

[Mailliw73 he/him]

You were in the PM.  

[Creccio he/him]

There is no alignment detecting role, uh...? (Misread on my part, kek) That complicates things... now, if there was a role like that i would wait, but having nothing like that makes things harder.

 

We should then discuss, who to lynch --if lynching is the best option in your eyes-- and let that person defend themselves. 

 

Let the "Contribution Crusade" do their work, but mind you, Eliminators are aware and should be active, so i see little benefit in only going after inactive persons they might just not understand a thing and stay on low profile.

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

I'm going to try something new: Honesty. I'm a tineye. I will be burning tonight, and would appreciate it if a lurcher would target me. That gives me a list of people to defend if they're up for a lynch. Are there problems with this plan? Yes. But it's better than just depending on votes.

And mailliw which PM was it in?

[Araris Valerian he/him]

Well, Creccio, the thing is in several recent games there have been inactive eliminators and they have really hurt their team. Silence from some people might mean that they are just waiting for the right time to post, but then at least they might come online to mention that.

 

I just saw Joe's post. I guess it is in line with what he did in the MR; trying to gather information. But I'm not sure how much we can tell from role distribution in this game. It is possible that the eliminators have a lurcher, I think is what I am trying to say. But no harm in trying I suppose.

 

My vote for now will go on Lopen since we haven't heard from him and I have plenty of time tomorrow to retract this vote if he responds.

 

Edit: Green Vote

Edited October 20, 2015 by Araris Valerian

[Gamma Fiend he/him]

A note that this game is Role Madness, so each players will have at least one power. Anything more than that will be PAFO, however.

In terms of failed attacks (lurching/pewterarm occurs) then it will be noted that there was a failed attack, but not much else than that. (I'll try not make it obvious of how it failed). Skaa kills will appear distinctly in the write-ups though, as those are a quite different nature than being coinshot.

Also, I will go ahead and apologize in advance, for my work schedule will probably seem very random, and the write-up times won't always be posted immediately. All cycles will last at least 48 hours, though, and I will do my best to keep it as consistent as possible.
 

[Mailliw73 he/him]

I'm going to try something new: Honesty. I'm a tineye. I will be burning tonight, and would appreciate it if a lurcher would target me. That gives me a list of people to defend if they're up for a lynch. Are there problems with this plan? Yes. But it's better than just depending on votes.

And mailliw which PM was it in?

Hmm. I'm reading you as honest this time, unlike your Merc story. I'll give you that, for now.

 

The LG14 one with me and Alv.

[Clanky he/him]

I'm going to try something new: Honesty. I'm a tineye. I will be burning tonight, and would appreciate it if a lurcher would target me. That gives me a list of people to defend if they're up for a lynch. Are there problems with this plan? Yes. But it's better than just depending on votes.

 

 

Yes there are many problems with this plan that definitely outweigh any good:

 

1) It is a waste of lurchers metals which are not unlimited

2) You are only told one of the people who targets you so if multiple lurchers target you you will only be told one.

3) Anyone can target you with any metal this cycle and you will have no way of knowing what metal they used 

4) Why would we reveal all lurchers to you anyway when they are the ones who should most remain hidden?

5) Why can't the Skaa have a lurcher when there are Coinshots in this game?

 

EDIT: Grammar and added point 5

Edited October 19, 2015 by Clanky

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

The pro's of it actually beong a plan that people can discuss outweigh the cons though.

As for your points:

1. That is true. But the likelyhood of a lurcher successfully blocking a kill are low anyway.

2. That's apro in my mind. Only the person I know is a villager gets the info. And right, I'm only told one person. Hmm. . .

3. *winks.

4. You already said I would only learn one lurcher. And I won't reveal a lurcher in thread.

5. Skaa wouldn't waste a lurcher on me. They have limited metal uses as well.

And dang mailliw. I was certain you would assume I was a thug or something. You're scary good at reading me.

[RippleGylf she/her]

I don't really have any good ideas at this point... I'm against irrational poke votes. If I vote for someone, it's because I am somewhat confident in my suspicions. Thus, I don't really want to lynch someone on the first day, but we need the info from said lynch to be able to make smart decisions. I'll abstain from voting for the time being until I have some solid suspicions.

 

EDIT: Playing Devil's Advocate here, but I think a wasted metal use would totally be worth getting trust if I was an eliminator. Much better than actually protecting someone.

Edited October 19, 2015 by RippleGylf

[Clanky he/him]

 

EDIT: Playing Devil's Advocate here, but I think a wasted metal use would totally be worth getting trust if I was an eliminator. Much better than actually protecting someone.

 

I agree with that point which is another reason that the plan is illogical. 

 

The pro's of it actually beong a plan that people can discuss outweigh the cons though.

As for your points:

1. That is true. But the likelyhood of a lurcher successfully blocking a kill are low anyway.

2. That's apro in my mind. Only the person I know is a villager gets the info. And right, I'm only told one person. Hmm. . .

3. *winks.

4. You already said I would only learn one lurcher. And I won't reveal a lurcher in thread.

5. Skaa wouldn't waste a lurcher on me. They have limited metal uses as well.

And dang mailliw. I was certain you would assume I was a thug or something. You're scary good at reading me.

Sure I agree that discussing a plan is always good that doesn't mean that the plan itself is a good one.

 

As for your other responses:

 

1) So you are saying that the lurchers are basically useless yet your whole plan revolves around protecting them from the lynch?

2) So we should have 2-3 lurchers waste a metal on you and only one of them will actually be revealed and the lurcher themself won't even know whether they got told or not. Does that mean they should target you every cycle just to make sure you find out? Apparently lurchers are useless anyways so why not.

3) 

4) What does a lurcher gain from telling you other than one person who may help them in case they are up for a lynch especially when they won't even know if you found out(See 2)

5) As I said in point three they don't need to waste a lurcher they could use any metal and it would be indistinguishable to you. Also Ripples point above is very valid

 

 

EDIT:  Isn't it more likely for a villager Lurcher to have success blocking a kill than a Skaa lurcher? Skaa lurchers only protect against coinshots who have limited attacks. Meanwhile a villager lurcher protects against conshoits and the Skaa kill. So wouldn't a skaa lurcher be more likely to waste a lurch?

Edited October 19, 2015 by Clanky

[Alfa he/him]

Ashbringer Fadroux frowned at the accusation of being a Skaa. It was a little bit offensive of Advantos to accuse him just to get him involved in the discussion about who was guilty. But Advantos Andierre Raynaud was from a house with a greater SE history, so he sighed and stepped forward.

"As it was calculated before, the chance of finding a rebel is not extremely high, but even 19,2 percent are worth a chance. Wurum Heron calculated an increase of 0,8 percent up to the next round, but in this calculation lies a small mistake. If we choose at random - and now we have no clues who the guilty persons are - we have 5 of 26 chances to get the rebel now. In 5 of this 26 cases in the tomorrow we have to face 4 rebels in 24 survors, and in the other 21 cases we will face 5 rebels in 24 survivors. The chances of not getting not a single rebel in the first two days are: (21/26)*[(5/26)*(20/24)+(21/26)*(19/24)] which is around 64,5%; which means that we have around one chance in three to catch at least one rebel today or tomorrow, if my calculation is right"

He looked around and faced A.A. Raynaud: "I was just not sure when to bring in my points. Until now we both are guided only by random guesses. Do believe me, I am not one of your enemies, but of course I have no proof. Nobody has. But better try to get rid of the rebels as fast as possible... So, let us look around. Phattemer/Axies; you didn't said anything. Are you a skaa?"

[Mailliw73 he/him]

And dang mailliw. I was certain you would assume I was a thug or something. You're scary good at reading me.

We'll see when one of us dies if I'm actually accurate.

[STINK he/him]

For all those people messing around with statistics and stuff? You forgot Coinshots...

[Curious Anamaximder he/him]

Honestly, I think it's just Venture acting like Venture. He has a habit to join things like this and only do one or two line responses.

EDIT: Not saying that's not what I'm doing too or anything.

Very true.

I am not sure if I am voting this cycle. Just want to get the feel of this game.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Venture Mistborn

[Mailliw73 he/him]

The only way I can see any type of verification is a mix of Tin and Bronze being used together. The problem is that, without PMs, the person being checked would have to be known by everyone.

[Clanky he/him]

For all those people messing around with statistics and stuff? You forgot Coinshots...

 

It is true that nobody has taken this into account with there odds. Either they forgot hat the role was present or they assume that only inquisitors have coinshots and that they will refrain from any killing until more info is available*. I would caution against assuming that the Skaa I would think it is very likely that they have one given the limited usage. Anyone agree?

 

* Just getting in my two cents that I don't like villager kill roles being used too early, especially in this game with limited vials.