Mid-Range Game 10: Divided Loyalties

[Amanuensis he/him]

Unfortunately the gap begins and ends with the fact that Elsecallers have the possibility of still existing, Adavantos

Also since you insist here's a larger "

 

Now, I do think that if we manage to have a system in place for the Scholars, at least one of them should go back and check random people who have already been checked, just to verify that they weren't messed with by an Elsecaller, without telling anyone else who they're scanning for obvious reasons.

 

While you bring up a valid point, Hellscythe, I was more concerned with getting the information out in the first place. If we can't do that then the Elsecallers don't even matter. Anyway, what Elbereth just said covers that just fine. There's really no other way to defend against that until we kill the Diagrammist Elsecaller, if there is one.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Adavantos

[Hellscythe he/him]

I agree information is key in this game. Unfortunately due to the rules there is next to none. And anything we can gather with our scholars has the potential to be false. Before this cycle there wasn't even more than 2-5 people able to use PM's.
 

And the way we're going to get any information is from calling out the people who aren't giving us any information whatsoever and sitting in the background watching us vote for each other safely from behind the non-posting wall of secrecy like Starry Smite who, by the way, I'm still voting for adamantly.

 

I agree we need information. *cough* Restares/Theidakar *cough*

I disagree on the way to obtain information.

 

Edit: I wonder what happens if two Elsecallers use their ability on the same dead person.... Whose takes precedence?

Edited December 17, 2015 by Hellscythe

[little wilson she/her]

I wonder what happens if two Elsecallers use their ability on the same dead person.... Whose takes precedence?

The coin takes precedence, of course. (by which I mean, the RNG will choose)

[Clanky he/him]

 TLDR; circumstances dictate, but we need to find a solution to this problem and fast. I think that if a single Scholar claimed publicly and another were in communication with someone via PM it would work out; we could basically use them to confirm one another. I.E. the one in the PM tells their intermediary the result, the intermediary announces in thread they know the result, the publicly claimed one announces their result, the intermediary confirms they are the same, and then we have a single Scholar that we can guarantee protection for while still protecting the intermediary and at least one other essential player.

 

 

A public Scholar could maybe work since there isn't any Roleblocking in this game. Their are however other circumstances that can affect this situation. Firstly we need to devise a system in which they always have protection. Since I doubt one faction would be happy with always using their protection on the Scholar we could alternate cycles i.e., SoH get Even cycles GB get Odd cycles.

 

If the Diagrammists have a Cook they can double tap and we will need double protection from both the surgeon and the Edgedancer, This can still be overcome fairly easily if the diagrammists have an Artifabrian to redirect the protection. 

 

Another thing is that the public Scholar would become an easy place for a Diagrammists Assassin to find out who our protection roles are making them vulnerable.

 

This could work but we will need to put some more thought into it before I will get behind it.

 

I agree information is key in this game. Unfortunately due to the rules there is next to none. And anything we can gather with our scholars has the potential to be false. Before this cycle there wasn't even more than 2-5 people able to use PM's.

 

And the way we're going to get any information is from calling out the people who aren't giving us any information whatsoever and sitting in the background watching us vote for each other safely from behind the non-posting wall of secrecy like Starry Smite who, by the way, I'm still voting for adamantly.

 

I agree we need information. *cough* Restares/Theidakar *cough*

I disagree on the way to obtain information.

 

Why Starry? Others haven't done much like Alvron, Shallan or feligon yet you have voted twice for Star adamantly. What is so special about this new slightly inactive player?

 

Hellscythe. While I don't think PK has defended himself well enough to be devoid of suspicion I will let him go for now.

[Paranoid King he/him]

Unfortunately the gap begins and ends with the fact that Elsecallers have the possibility of still existing, Adavantos.

With Elsecallers the Scholars are essentially useless in the fact that not only can WE not trust their reads on dead players, but even THEY can't trust their own findings!

Well, there's certainly more than one Scholar, and those scholars don't have to scan those who just died. Some scholars can scan those in the current cycle, while others scan a random person who died in a previous cycle. Even though the usefulness of scholars is diminished, they're still your best source of info.

[Kynedath]

Continuing my suspicions of Paranoid King:

 

You claimed that you wanted to get more information on D1 by not focusing on the HS STINK conundrum. You instead picked a moderately attacked person to involve instead of either trying to find extremely damning evidence on one of the two involved in the conflict, or attacking one of the less noticed players and gathering information on them. One you could have possibly solidified the death of a diagrammist and the other you could have obtained more information, which was your claimed goal, on a player with even less info on them than Sart. 

 

You claim that you have seen STINK play games before this and you know his playstyle, therefore having a good basis for him not being a diagrammist. He would purposefully tried to play like he did before to lessen the suspicions of him. Previous games are not a good basis for guilt. Maybe motives or experience level, but not if they are on the eliminator team or not.

 

Because of the (shaky) reasons listed above to think STINK a good guy, you decided to vote on Sart instead without even checking to see if there was any reason he would be an eliminator. You just assumed he was a digrammist because . . . oh right. You didn't give your logic. You even admitted that you didn't have enough time to study his motives and decide if he was guilty or not. 

 

Later, you claim to have forgotten that day and night cycles were combined. That was a crucial part of the game and I don't believe that anybody could forget that everything happened at once. It seems like a cover-up and an excuse for something you did.

 

You later recognized that peoples motives were going to affect the likelihood of a WGG but then proceeded to base your presented statistics on pure random probability. After that, you said that you thought Adavantos wanted hard numbers when there wasn't a single mention of concrete numbers. Another cover-up? I think that you might have been trying to give us the wrong stats so that we would feel near certain about Venture's near death experience. Posting that there was an 80% chance that it was a WGG put in our minds that it was almost certain when there was no real motive in doing so and the circumstances of the attempted homicide made it very likely that the healer would have tried to save Venture.

 

In the first post of page 6, you say that "Someone needed to die!" for the purpose of gathering information. Someone was going to die anyways. The essence of your post was that a death needed to happen quickly so that the scholars could give the results back as soon as possible. Your irrational aggressive nature with Sart was not going to make it any faster. The Lynch still would have happened and you still had no proof that Sart was evil. See paragraph 3.

 

Your next post told us that even with all of the arguments laid out by the other players, you still thought that it was a WGG. That might just be because you are trying to mislead the players and direct us to a solution that would force us to argue among ourselves for no reason. Keeping with your flawed statistics, you kept believing something that would lead only to bickering and argumentation. I am by no means saying that Venture is innocent, but there is almost no reason to suspect him by the attempt on his life.

 

In a later post, you claimed that we could protect the schoolars every night if one of the surgeons protected them every night. That is incorrect as a double kill, a lynch or an action movement occurred. That could have been an attempt to make us believe the wrong facts and expose our scholars, or it could have been an honest mistake, I'm not sure which.

 

That is all of the evidence I have against you for now.

 

 

In regards to the Hellscythe conflict, I feel like he is fairly suspicious as there was no reason for anyone to believe that he was a KR like he said there was. Whoever targeted him did so in cycle one when nobody knew anything about his abilities. Hellscythe claimed that since there was the possibility, then people would attack for just the possibility. The chances that he was were low to begin with and while yes, he did raise them with his reveal, still aren't assured.

 

Nevertheless, I still have much more of a suspicion of PK, but I will be watching this turn of events as it unfolds and see what I can find while it does. I will see what I can find on this situation then give my opinion again.

[Hellscythe he/him]

When I was looking at the list of names Elbereth posted I chose Starry Smite. For no reason at all. It could've been any one of those people. I just chose Starry Smite. I don't see a problem with that though. They're all the same. Why do I have to have a reason why I singled out one of them? I can't vote for all of them or else I would.

 

I'm the suspicious one for being attacked by the Cook now?! What has the world come to.

 

Also PK like I said in my post I disagree that it's our best source of info. I would agree in a normal game, but like you already said it's going to take forever to get information that I'm not counting on to wait for only to be potentially false.

Our best source of info in my opinion is to get people talking about who their suspicions are and catch someone slipping.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Unfortunately the gap begins and ends with the fact that Elsecallers have the possibility of still existing, Adavantos.

With Elsecallers the Scholars are essentially useless in the fact that not only can WE not trust their reads on dead players, but even THEY can't trust their own findings!

 

I'm not saying the Diagrammists should be underestimated every cycle or every game. I'm saying I was one step ahead of them last cycle even if I wasn't a surgeon. Which was only proven by the attack.

Also since you insist here's a larger "sample size" for you Mail.

How could you be one step ahead of them? Unless you were the Surgeon/ED that protected Venture, and you've already claimed and been shown to be an Explorer/EC, you didn't do anything to stay ahead of them. You showed what your thought process was, and that's great. But saying that you are more intelligent than the Eliminators comes off as cocky and when people get cocky, people make mistakes. *coughKippertunnelcough*

Great stats, but this isn't Town of Salem, so not really relevant, but thanks.

 

I agree information is key in this game. Unfortunately due to the rules there is next to none. And anything we can gather with our scholars has the potential to be false. Before this cycle there wasn't even more than 2-5 people able to use PM's.

 

And the way we're going to get any information is from calling out the people who aren't giving us any information whatsoever and sitting in the background watching us vote for each other safely from behind the non-posting wall of secrecy like Starry Smite who, by the way, I'm still voting for adamantly.

 

I agree we need information. *cough* Restares/Theidakar *cough*

I disagree on the way to obtain information.

 

Edit: I wonder what happens if two Elsecallers use their ability on the same dead person.... Whose takes precedence?

Why Starry? Others haven't done much like Alvron, Shallan or feligon yet you have voted twice for Star adamantly. What is so special about this new slightly inactive player?

 

Hellscythe. While I don't think PK has defended himself well enough to be devoid of suspicion I will let him go for now.

^This. Why Starry? There are those who haven't even posted at all since the game began or those who haven't posted this cycle at all, but Starry has posted already.

[Hellscythe he/him]

Sorry, for not posting earlier, but I didn't get on sunday, and there was a lot more to read than I expected.  I was planning on voting, but I was too late.  I'll make sure to keep up better this cycle.

 

I'll put my vote on Bort.  Our main focus should be to take out all the Diagramists.

 

Not really?

 

I already answered "Why Starry?"

 

edit: @Shallan There's a bandwagon because..... because I got attacked? Yeah that makes sense. Actually now that I'm rereading the votes there's been no reasoning behind any of the votes other than maybe Clanky for not liking the contribution crusade? Or maybe Clanky doesn't know why I singled out Starry? Which is probably valid because I don't know why I picked Starry either. There wasn't any methodical choosing amongst a group of people who haven't posted.

"I don't see Hellscythe as a legitimate target for a cook" - Zas

"My main suspicions now are Hellscythe and Bort, who'd be at about 75" - Mail

Edited December 17, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Shallan she/her]

I am a bit confused why there is a bandwagon on Hellscythe. Is it because we think there was a WGG? I would assume not, since it was a cook, but I have to go reread the thread again now...

(Hellscythe ninja'd me)

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Not really?

 

I already answered "Why Starry?"

 

edit: @Shallan There's a bandwagon because..... because I got attacked? Yeah that makes sense. Actually now that I'm rereading the votes there's been no reasoning behind any of the votes other than maybe Clanky for not liking the contribution crusade?

"I don't see Hellscythe as a legitimate target for a cook" - Zas

"My main suspicions now are Hellscythe and Bort, who'd be at about 75" - Mail

 

Who are you answering? You quoted Starry, but the Not Really doesn't make any sense in that context.

[Clanky he/him]

When I was looking at the list of names Elbereth posted I chose Starry Smite. For no reason at all. It could've been any one of those people. I just chose Starry Smite. I don't see a problem with that though. They're all the same. Why do I have to have a reason why I singled out one of them? I can't vote for all of them or else I would.

 

 

So a random choice was how starry got chosen. Did you randomly choose her both cycles? I and most players here tend to allow newer players a bit of leniency for the first bit of a game. They are always more likely to go inactive and she hasn't been on in 24hrs so it isn't like she is lurking. Also if it was just random choice why were you "adamant" about your vote for her and felt the need to post your vote twice when she hasn't even been on the shard. There are many more egregious inactives with experience and history of being active. If you are looking for someone purposefully hiding behind inactivity why not start with them?

 

I am a bit confused why there is a bandwagon on Hellscythe. Is it because we think there was a WGG? I would assume not, since it was a cook, but I have to go reread the thread again now...

(Hellscythe ninja'd me)

 

Firstly two votes isn't a bandwagon. Secondly we have no proof Hell was Cooked, it could've been any action on him that failed and they just claimed a cook attack since we know there's a missing one. Third I don't think it is outlandish at all to assume the Diagrammists have a cook. 

 

EDIT: GRammar and things

Edited December 17, 2015 by Clanky

[Shallan she/her]

I was actually just thinking to myself as I read through that I didn't think there would be 4 cooks.

Even with an original 36 people, 6 potential kills per cycle seems a little outlandish. So STINK, you might want to talk to that person a bit more and ask what their real role is.

[Hellscythe he/him]

 

So a random choice was how starry got chosen. Did you randomly choose her both cycles?

 

Yes? I just picked one and stuck with it? Why pick a different one? I didn't even know Starry was new nor does it necessarily matter. I didn't see any posts until Mail even mentioned they posted today. I agree other people who have a history of being active should be posting but focusing our attention on me and not on them isn't doing anything about the situation.

 

 

but Starry has posted already.

 

Not really?

 

[Clanky he/him]

I was actually just thinking to myself as I read through that I didn't think there would be 4 cooks.

Even with an original 36 people, 6 potential kills per cycle seems a little outlandish. So STINK, you might want to talk to that person a bit more and ask what their real role is.

You also have to take into account at least 4 protective roles and at least 4 players who have partial immunity to non-lynch kill attempts. Also given that it must be an even number 4 cooks seems much more reasonable then 2 given all the defensive abilities and the fact that this is role madness.

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Yes? I just picked one and stuck with it? Why pick a different one? I didn't even know Starry was new nor does it necessarily matter. I didn't see any posts until Mail even mentioned they posted today. I agree other people who have a history of being active should be posting but focusing our attention on me and not on them isn't doing anything about the situation.

 

Not really.

It matters because killing newbies doesn't help them learn how to play the game or encourage new players from signing up.

 

More so than some others, notably Polking, Honey Badger, Ripple, Orlok, Jain, Alv, etc. They've all played games before and haven't given a reason for their absence. Starry, on the other hand, is brand new and has posted.

[phattemer]

Given all that, I think I will instead of Shallan vote for Hellscythe. A lot of the stuff you've said just hasn't added up, and added to that the fact that a Diagrammist EC/Explorer is likely, I believe you're the best option.

[Hellscythe he/him]

If you agree with me then vote for them and I'll join you I was planning on doing the same the the last cycle. But at this point it seems like I'm the only one who wants to attack the inactives at all. I understand why you all think Starry is a bad idea, but that doesn't change my vote until another inactive is voted on. There's no reason to change my vote.

 

"added to that the fact that a Diagrammist EC/Explorer is likely" - This just makes me angry like is he serious?

Edited December 17, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Mailliw73 he/him]

If you agree with me then vote for them and I'll join you I was planning on doing the same the the last cycle. But at this point it seems like I'm the only one who wants to attack the inactives at all. I understand why you all think Starry is a bad idea, but that doesn't change my vote until another inactive is voted on. There's no reason to change my vote.

 

"added to that the fact that a Diagrammist EC/Explorer is likely" - This just makes me angry like is he serious?

If there weren't already plenty of votes on you, PK, and Venture, I would. In fact, I might still vote for Venture. I'm not convinced of either of you, but at least you've defended yourself. Venture hasn't. Of the current lynch candidates, he's the most inactive. 

 

Why so? It is very likely.

[Hellscythe he/him]

 

Why so? It is very likely.

Role-distribution was done purely based on RNG. I let randomness decide everything Point is, everything from who is on the Diagrammist team to what they have and what ranks they have and who holds them was all random. 

*sigh*

Edited December 17, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Clanky he/him]

Role-distribution was done purely based on RNG. I let randomness decide everything. Did I always take the first roll? No. There were some things that I rolled multiple times on, because of whatever reason. Point is, everything from who is on the Diagrammist team to what they have and what ranks they have and who holds them was all random. Yes, I had an idea of what I wanted, but I did not handpick a single thing anywhere in the distribution.

 

 

Good job on twisting the post to make it fit your reasoning Hellscythe!

[phattemer]

Wilson said that she rerolled the RNG sometimes if it was needed. Obviously an Elsecaller or Explorer would not be unbalanced on the Diagrammist side, and as such, it is more likely to be there then, say, a Cook, which might skew the game in the Diagrammists' favor.

It isn't as likely as a usual game, where roles are picked and players randomly generated (I don't mean to say that in this one players were picked. I mean that in this one both were randomized.), but still many reasonable setups include an Explorer or Elsecaller on their side.

[Hellscythe he/him]

Yes.

Wilson didn't stick with the first roll because there weren't enough Explorers on the Diagrammist team.

That's exactly it.

You're all genius'.

You got me, I'm a Diagrammist.

How did you know all along?

Gee golly I've been outsmarted.

[Mailliw73 he/him]

*sigh*

What everyone means is that an Elsecaller, because of the Transformation surge, is much more likely to be on the Diagrammists team than not. There is little use for a SoH or GB one. The Transportation ability would also grant them another protection role, but a limited one, so not to unbalance the team.

[Kynedath]

if you think about it, it's not all that likely.

 

I'll be pulling from genetics for these stats.

I'm assuming that everybody has learned about a punnett square.

Unfortunately, I can't do a visual representation of it.

 

Just like in genetics, we are taking from two categories. In genetics, you would look at mothers genes and fathers genes. In this, I'm looking at Diagrammist or not and EC or Explorer.

 

The possibilities are

Dia Explorer

Dia EC

non-Dia Explorer

non-Dia EC

 

only one of these can be true. the most threatening would be Dia EC but there is only a 25% chance of that if you are not considering the chances of there being KRs on the Dia team (see my earlier post on this subject)

There is a 50% chance that HS is on either side at this point.

 

PS. 5 new posts since I started writing this.