Long Game 67: The Road to Urithiru

[Mat he/him]

Just now, Araris Valerian said:

@Matrim's Dice You missed the last bit of Striker's post:

Basically if there is a counterclaim that is proven false, there is a fairly obvious lynch that should follow.

Ah, I see, thanks. My bad... 

Also, on an OOG note, your reputation is at 666- Torturer of Heralds.

[Elbereth she/her]

@Araris Valerian what do you think of Ventyl’s claim? 

1 hour ago, Gears said:

Your words are wise.

You have convinced me. Elbereth. 

Excellent. 

1 hour ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Would redirecting an action to someone who ended up dead be conclusive enough for you to claim the redirect, either in thread or in PM assuming they're open at the time? This could be what PM chains are supposed to be for, but unlike conclusive alignment scans, including an elim in a PM chain would give the redirected player enough warning to come up with an excuse.

I don’t know. I would definitely recommend telling someone through PMs, because that information could be extremely useful later, and probably confronting the person to see what they have to say. Whether to do it in thread I think is trickier, and ideally you’d have the redirecter in contact with a scanner to tie things up nicely without the possibility of revealing a village kill role. 

But mostly I think it depends on how much people end up using their roleblocks and redirects. If they’re relatively rare (which I’d... probably recommend? Chaos is bad for the village, generally) (would appreciate further thoughts on that), then it’s absolutely worth bringing up in thread - there’s still chance for it to be wrong, but a high enough chance to catch an elim that I think it’s worth it. But if redirects and roleblocks are flying around like confetti, the information is much less useful (depending on the game state, too - eg if there are six players left, definitely claim and mechanically you may well be able to work out what happened; that’s a lot harder with 24). 

19 minutes ago, StrikerEZ said:

Hmm...I hadn’t thought about that. My thought process was more focused on the player doing the redirecting, not the player getting redirected. If the redirecter claims (whether publicly or anonymously) that the redirected player must be an elim and no one counter claims (whether publicly or anonymously), I think it would be fairly safe to assume that the redirected player is actually a villager at that point.

Wait, what? Why?

 

@Frozen Mint get in here  

[Sart he/him]

I'm just going to copy and paste Elbereth's role breakdown here, since it's a useful reference.

Spoiler

StrikerEZ I find this discussion to be a distraction for the village. Most of your posts have been extolling the virtues of Transportation, even voting on Gears due to his assertion that Adhesion is better than Transportation. There are two problems with your argument.

1. Adhesion is strictly better than Transportation for determining the night kill. If there is no night kill, there are only two possibilities. Either the kill action was canceled, or the elims forgot to put in a kill. A kill blocked by Progression is reported via the write-up. A lack of kill is generally a dead giveaway that Adhesion was successful. Contrast that with Transportation. While it is true you may have directed the elim kill to your target, it is just as likely that the elims targeted that person. This scenario creates plenty of false positives, and won't be helpful.
2. Radiants with Transportation have much better things to do. Elsecallers can just scan for alignment, which is a much easier way to learn who is evil. Willshapers have access to Cohesion, which is also a much better action to use. It works as a form of protection, and can lead to the elims killing themselves. Even if you accidentally disrupt a scan, Transformation results reveal the person that it hit, so that won't be an issue.

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

[Ashbringer he/him]

Anyone who claims Village Dustbringer (or Skybreaker) is going to have a LOT of actions thrown at them. Elim Kills, Progression Heals, Roleblocks, Redirects, and probably the real Dustbringer’s kill if applicable.

In most circumstances, two players claiming identical roles will just get them both killed in some way. If a Village Dustbringer sees someone else claim their role, it might be easier to just not contest the claim and then kill the false claimer. Generally the first person to claim a role is believed first (until a lynch proves otherwise), and losing a Dustbringer is a lot worse than killing one (likely roleless) Elim.

Also, the first night turn of LG13 ended with a Gravitation-boosted Elim kill preventing a Progression save. And later the Village Skybreaker Gravitation-boosted their Division kill to get rid of an outed Elim who had been Squired with Abrasion.  So if the strategy stays similar I think Grav-boosting kills might be fairly common.

4 minutes ago, Sart said:

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

So, bad analysis means an elim lean? Remember that Gears is new to roles, and even older players mess up on strategies. Plus different players will use the same roles in many different ways.

I feel like for judging analysis, it might be better to see which roles are more or less analyzed. IE if someone doesn’t make any analysis (or makes noncommital analysis, way too much analysis, etc) for, say, Windrunners, then someone dies as an Elim Windrunner, that could be AI. Or it could mean that they are the Windrunner.

[Straw he/him]

13 minutes ago, Sart said:

I'm just going to copy and paste Elbereth's role breakdown here, since it's a useful reference.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I don't think your image was pasted correctly. Also, it's in the quicklinks.

Also, I'll probably just be posting the vote count whenever I make a post in the thread or whenever someone requests one. Here's the current vote count:

Gears (2): Orlok Tsubodai, StrikerEZ
A Joe in the Bush (1): Ventyl
Elbereth (1): Gears
Matrim's Dice (1): Elbereth
StrikerEZ (1): Sart
Ventyl (1): Araris Valerian

[Mat he/him]

42 minutes ago, Sart said:

I'm just going to copy and paste Elbereth's role breakdown here, since it's a useful reference.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

StrikerEZ I find this discussion to be a distraction for the village. Most of your posts have been extolling the virtues of Transportation, even voting on Gears due to his assertion that Adhesion is better than Transportation. There are two problems with your argument.

1. Adhesion is strictly better than Transportation for determining the night kill. If there is no night kill, there are only two possibilities. Either the kill action was canceled, or the elims forgot to put in a kill. A kill blocked by Progression is reported via the write-up. A lack of kill is generally a dead giveaway that Adhesion was successful. Contrast that with Transportation. While it is true you may have directed the elim kill to your target, it is just as likely that the elims targeted that person. This scenario creates plenty of false positives, and won't be helpful.
2. Radiants with Transportation have much better things to do. Elsecallers can just scan for alignment, which is a much easier way to learn who is evil. Willshapers have access to Cohesion, which is also a much better action to use. It works as a form of protection, and can lead to the elims killing themselves. Even if you accidentally disrupt a scan, Transformation results reveal the person that it hit, so that won't be an issue.

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

^That makes a lot of sense to me. And, I went back and read Striker's post that I was confused about again, and even though I said I understood it... I don't understand it. So, StrikerEZ for now.

[Araris Valerian he/him]

40 minutes ago, Sart said:

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

The reason I consider role analysis posts NAI is that the person posting them has nothing at stake (and thus there is no reason for an elim to give away information), and their post isn't helping solve the game (something a village would want to do). These are the main two things that make me think someone is one alignment or the other.

On a personal note, I rarely read through role analysis posts because I largely find them about as useful as poke votes. People should usually do their own thinking about how to best use their role. 

[Magestar he/him]

Good grief.  You guys are so talkative.    Shame my shift started at one today.

4 hours ago, Elbereth said:

(and also if I were a whichever-has-scans in this particular game, I would do absolutely no alignment scans because I’m village and ridiculously excited about it and I’m determined to solve this game the old fashioned way ). 

I appreciate this.  My goal for the previous game I was in, this game, and future games is to hone my analysis skills, which I feel are somewhat lacking.  It's something to do during quarantine, anyway.   

So uh.  Is this poke vote debate thing new?  I don't think I've seen it before.  I remember the "typical" poke vote being the norm.   

Anyway, I don't think it's really a big deal. It seems to be between people who vote to get people to post and people who vote to get people to post, through slightly different methodology.  I like the discussion driving votes, such as El's; they definitely have good reasoning behind them.  They stir the pot, get discussion moving.  That's good.    But I also don't really see anything wrong with the "I voted on you because you haven't posted yet" thing either.  It gives a little pressure; not much, but it's there for sure.  I'm always more likely to post if I have a vote on me, anyway.  I don't think it's necessary to differentiate those and other kinds of poke votes.  I think "poke" vote describes both fairly well, although the term stab vote amuses me.  People have different styles, and I think this is more of a stylistic thing.

And those are all my thoughts on the matter, and it's probably all I'll say.  While it's certainly an interesting topic conceptually, it's something I don't think is terribly useful to finding Elims.   

55 minutes ago, Sart said:

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

7 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

The reason I consider role analysis posts NAI is that the person posting them has nothing at stake (and thus there is no reason for an elim to give away information), and their post isn't helping solve the game (something a village would want to do). These are the main two things that make me think someone is one alignment or the other.

On a personal note, I rarely read through role analysis posts because I largely find them about as useful as poke votes. People should usually do their own thinking about how to best use their role.

I have to agree with Sart on this one.  I personally tend to think that a lot of "unkeyed" role analysis, where you just analyze the roles without giving suggestions, leans a little more Elim, especially in newer players.  It's a good way to seem like you're helping while really just hiding.  On the other hand, analysis specifically directed towards helping the village, with specific points on what certain roles mean to the village and how they should be used, leans a little more village for me.  This is mostly the case in newer players, and is sort of a general thing.  It's not always accurate, but it does influence my suspicions.

Other things... I don't have a lot of other thoughts immediately.  I like what El's doing, but I don't think it's terribly alignment indicative given that it's El doing it.  I might share some other suspicions later in the cycle, but I'll probably hold back for a bit and see where things go.

I will definitely vote by the end of the cycle.  Today's been a long and busy day for me, but tomorrow is my day off so hopefully I'll be able to post more.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Magestar
Grammar. also dang I use a lot of :P

[Orlok Tsubodai]

recognising im voting on him, id note that gears behaved in a similar manner in my qf, insofar as rejecting d1 lynches or voting to gain info. strong disagreement with him, obvs, but less ai than if another made same erroneous point.

also, get rekt, wilson. you thought i couldnt do this.

[Araris Valerian he/him]

7 minutes ago, Orlok Tsubodai said:

Strong disagreement with Gears, obviously, but less AI than if another person made the same erroneous point.

Yeah, I'd agree that it's important to distinguish between a different opinion about optimal play versus intentionally trying to hurt the village. I would even go so far as to say that elims might try a little harder to conform to what is considered helpful in the current meta than villagers do. So people doing things I disagree with often (but not always) lands them a very slight village read, at least at the start of the game.

[StrikerEZ he/him]

1 hour ago, Sart said:

I'm just going to copy and paste Elbereth's role breakdown here, since it's a useful reference.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

StrikerEZ I find this discussion to be a distraction for the village. Most of your posts have been extolling the virtues of Transportation, even voting on Gears due to his assertion that Adhesion is better than Transportation. There are two problems with your argument.

1. Adhesion is strictly better than Transportation for determining the night kill. If there is no night kill, there are only two possibilities. Either the kill action was canceled, or the elims forgot to put in a kill. A kill blocked by Progression is reported via the write-up. A lack of kill is generally a dead giveaway that Adhesion was successful. Contrast that with Transportation. While it is true you may have directed the elim kill to your target, it is just as likely that the elims targeted that person. This scenario creates plenty of false positives, and won't be helpful.
2. Radiants with Transportation have much better things to do. Elsecallers can just scan for alignment, which is a much easier way to learn who is evil. Willshapers have access to Cohesion, which is also a much better action to use. It works as a form of protection, and can lead to the elims killing themselves. Even if you accidentally disrupt a scan, Transformation results reveal the person that it hit, so that won't be an issue.

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

First off, I would like to say that I don't think I was extolling the virtues of Transportation, more just arguing with Gears about the reliability of the redirects. I don't think I ever stated that I thought that it was better than Adhesion at finding elims, just saying that it wasn't completely useless when trying to find elims. And the vote redirect (Rioter) is super powerful because it doesn't even have the normal side effect of cancelling your own vote. Either way, I agree that Adhesion is probably better if you're trying to find an elim, but I don't think that Transportation is utterly useless.

Also, I do agree that Elsecallers should probably be using Transformation rather than Transportation, but I don't see how Cohesion is necessarily better than Transportation.

And I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree on whether or not role analysis is AI. I guess it might help if we define exactly what we're talking about. When I say role analysis, I'm usually talking about people going through and basically restating what each of the roles do but in their own words, with maybe some thoughts about the best way to do it. I don't think that's particularly helpful for the village at best and is a complete derailment of the thread (if it's done later in the first cycle) at worst. If people are giving thoughts about what specific roles should be doing to help the village, then I think we can get AI information from that. Does that make sense?

58 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

^That makes a lot of sense to me. And, I went back and read Striker's post that I was confused about again, and even though I said I understood it... I don't understand it. So, StrikerEZ for now.

Care to explain why you're confused? Maybe the beginning of this post clears up any confusion?

[Mat he/him]

Quote

2 hours ago, StrikerEZ said:

In that case, the elims are highly unlikely to ever be the counterclaim as that will just result in the “fake” being revealed as not elim and result in the elim getting lynched for it. I guess they could play some IKYK games, but in most cases we should always lynch the player who makes a counterclaim if the first player turns out to not be an elim.

I may be wrong, but I think this contradicts itself. "The elims are highly unlikely to ever be the counterclaim" to "we should always lynch the player who makes a counterclaim if the first player turns out to not be an elim". Can you explain my confusion?  

Quoting myself ^

I still don't get how what you said there isn't a direct contradiction to itself :P.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

4 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Quoting myself ^

I still don't get how what you said there isn't a direct contradiction to itself :P.

An elim will never counterclaim a village Division user(unless it's LyLo), because once the villager dies the next player to be lynched will be the elim who counterclaimed. The only normal reason someone would counterclaim is if they were a villager who knew the first person was lying.

[Mat he/him]

1 minute ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

An elim will never counterclaim a village Division user(unless it's LyLo), because once the villager dies the next player to be lynched will be the elim who counterclaimed. The only normal reason someone would counterclaim is if they were a villager who knew the first person was lying.

Yes. This is the first part of Striker's post.

The second part is why I'm confused:

Quote

in most cases we should always lynch the player who makes a counterclaim if the first player turns out to not be an elim.

If we did this, and lynched the second player, Striker's original point would say that the second player is also village because an elim wouldn't counterclaim a village Division user. Of course we wouldn't do that- these points contradict each other.

Am I the only one that's confused about this? xD @StrikerEZ Hellllllllllllllllllp.

[StrikerEZ he/him]

13 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Quoting myself ^

I still don't get how what you said there isn't a direct contradiction to itself :P.

Devotary already said it better than I would, but an elim wouldn’t counter claim. And we lynch anyone who does will be lynched if the person they say is lying does and was telling the truth.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

10 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Yes. This is the first part of Striker's post.

The second part is why I'm confused:

If we did this, and lynched the second player, Striker's original point would say that the second player is also village because an elim wouldn't counterclaim a village Division user. Of course we wouldn't do that- these points contradict each other.

Am I the only one that's confused about this? xD @StrikerEZ Hellllllllllllllllllp.

I think Striker's point is that it's extremely unlikely for the counterclaimer to be a villager if the original claimer was also a villager, and that it's more likely that the elims decided to throw away a team member just to get rid of a kill role. However, while there usually aren't multiple village killers, in this game, it is possible for there to have been say a village Dustbringer and their village Division!Dustbringer squire who ended up killing the same person after a redirect in an extremely unfortunate turn of events and utter failure of communication. In that case both claimants would be telling the truth.

Edit: Even it that case it shouldn't be an issue though, since the KR is almost guaranteed to be village so wouldn't be lynched if the squire dies first, and a village squire would never suggest killing their knight. I guess there could be a village Dustbringer and a village Skybreaker, but in general it's very unlikely that a village kill role will be counterclaimed whether by an elim or a villager, and a squire regardless of alignment should make sure that their outed Knight doesn't get lynched.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Devotary of Spontaneity

[Ashbringer he/him]

4 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

However, while there usually aren't multiple village killers, in this game, it is possible for there to have been say a village Dustbringer and their village Division!Dustbringer squire who ended up killing the same person after a redirect in an extremely unfortunate turn of events and utter failure of communication. In that case both claimants would be telling the truth.

I don’t even know if this is a likely possibility. The redirected killer would know that their kill didn’t hit the right person. And talking about it could just make a redirecter start puppet-mastering the Division user.

Also, Radiants get a free PM with their Squires. So drastic miscommunication is unlikely, unless one is doing it delibrately.

[The Young Pyromancer he/him]

31 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

I think Striker's point is that it's extremely unlikely for the counterclaimer to be a villager if the original claimer was also a villager,

Eh, I'd consider that, if just to try to see who jumped on who. Also, isn't it possible two people have the same role?

[Ashbringer he/him]

5 minutes ago, The Young Pyromancer said:

Eh, I'd consider that, if just to try to see who jumped on who. Also, isn't it possible two people have the same role?

You’re here!

It could be, but unless they both targeted the same player I doubt a second identical role would counter-claim the first.

@Straw, what info is given upon action success? Will players be notified if they are roleblocked or redirected? That might have been what someone tried to ask already, but it’s hard to scroll through to find it.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

33 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

what info is given upon action success? Will players be notified if they are roleblocked or redirected? That might have been what someone tried to ask already, but it’s hard to scroll through to find it.

Quote

In general, you're not given any information about the results of your actions. You have to use the information you can see (writeup, PMs open/closed, Transformation results) to figure out what happened.

The only time anyone gets information about their action results is using Transformation to learn surges or alignment. Someone whose Transformation action gets redirected is informed who they got redirected to.

@The Young Pyromancer, it is more likely than usual for there to be multiple village killers given that KR only get two actions per three cycles and can spend their stormlight on other actions.

[Kynedath]

I'm here! Man you guys are prolific. I definitely haven't absorbed a lot of the information people are throwing out there, but I have a few things that have stuck to my brain.

First off, @Gears your style of speech is throwing me off. You talk in a very formal way, being sure to use the right words but at the same time making it just a little harder to understand your true meaning. I want to say that is suspicious to me because it could be a newer elim trying to be deliberate in their words and not give anything away. I remember that was what I was like my first couple times being an elim. But at the same time that could just be your brain and how it works, I'm not one to judge. For now I'll just say that I'll keep my eye on you!

Initially I thought it was suspicious that Matrim sided with Sart so quickly against Striker, but on further reflection it makes sense considering they were confused about what Striker was saying. Sarts analysis would have swayed them real easy and clarified things for them. What makes me pause now is how they said that they understood when they really didn't. This actually makes me trust them a bit more since instead of bringing it back up to the thread they could have asked fellow eliminators to clarify things for them when they were back in the doc.

In regards to the whole role analysis deal, I think it's completely NAI, whether it's done before or after getting roles and alignments. I'll skim them but I know that other beope will bring up the important stuff.

That's about all I have for the night, but if anyone has any questions for me, feel free to ask. Answering specific questions would definitely help me get a better grip on this game which is honestly going at a breakneck pace. Please @ me if you do though, I'd appreciate it.

[The Young Pyromancer he/him]

@Kynedath would you support a Gear lynch?

@Orlok Tsubodai Actually, Wilson was right. You're messing something up. 

[Elbereth she/her]

5 hours ago, Sart said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

1. Adhesion is strictly better than Transportation for determining the night kill. If there is no night kill, there are only two possibilities. Either the kill action was canceled, or the elims forgot to put in a kill. A kill blocked by Progression is reported via the write-up. A lack of kill is generally a dead giveaway that Adhesion was successful. Contrast that with Transportation. While it is true you may have directed the elim kill to your target, it is just as likely that the elims targeted that person. This scenario creates plenty of false positives, and won't be helpful.

I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that role analysis posts are NAI. They are absolutely indicative of alignment. Yes, Gears said that he wrote his post before the game started, but if he was an elim, you can modify those posts to encourage poor strategies. By analyzing the ruleset, we analyze player's thoughts, and can detect role and alignment.

Orr the person who put in the kill hit someone with Abrasion. Or someone hit the target with Tension. Not to mention that kill type won’t be distinguished, so if someone uses Division that night and one of the kills is blocked, no one except the elims and the kill role would even know. Both situations create plenty of false positives, is my point, and I don’t think Transportation is worse than Adhesion in that respect. 

If you prewrote a post and found out you were evil, would you change it? Do you think there were any bad strategies in Gears’ analysis? Why would it be a better idea to bring up bad strategies than to try to seem village and helpful - ie if there were bad ideas in there wouldn’t they be caught anyway, and all Gears would get is a lot more suspicion? 

5 hours ago, Magestar said:

So uh.  Is this poke vote debate thing new?  I don't think I've seen it before.  I remember the "typical" poke vote being the norm.   

Anyway, I don't think it's really a big deal. It seems to be between people who vote to get people to post and people who vote to get people to post, through slightly different methodology.  I like the discussion driving votes, such as El's; they definitely have good reasoning behind them.  They stir the pot, get discussion moving.  That's good.    But I also don't really see anything wrong with the "I voted on you because you haven't posted yet" thing either.  It gives a little pressure; not much, but it's there for sure.  I'm always more likely to post if I have a vote on me, anyway.  I don't think it's necessary to differentiate those and other kinds of poke votes.  I think "poke" vote describes both fairly well, although the term stab vote amuses me.  People have different styles, and I think this is more of a stylistic thing.

I have to agree with Sart on this one.  I personally tend to think that a lot of "unkeyed" role analysis, where you just analyze the roles without giving suggestions, leans a little more Elim, especially in newer players.  It's a good way to seem like you're helping while really just hiding.  On the other hand, analysis specifically directed towards helping the village, with specific points on what certain roles mean to the village and how they should be used, leans a little more village for me.  This is mostly the case in newer players, and is sort of a general thing.  It's not always accurate, but it does influence my suspicions.

Re: pokevotes: (feel free to ignore this; Mage is entirely correct that it’s a pretty NAI topic but I’m going to voice my opinions anyway because apparently that’s just how I am ) It’s not a particularly new debate, it’s just that it used to be subsumed into the “do we have a d1 lynch” debate, and after that it was basically Araris arguing against them and no one else. Which made it less a debate and more a “what the heck is Araris doing and is it suspicious?” thing, which was very sad. 
It’s interesting to know that votes actually motivate you to post! I don’t think I’ve heard anyone say that yet. Is that true for poke votes before you’ve even posted at all, too? Because I can see it later in the game, certainly, but I still struggle to see someone look at the thread for the first time and then just decide not to post, whether or not they have a vote on them. 
(And I’m not going to go on more about this but I also very much think that poke votes of that kind are way less useful and give the elims the ability to hide behind not having opinions or doing anything risky like being suspicious. Will expand on that only if asked.)

So you like role analysis when it’s directed at how the village can use them, but not general role analysis. Which would you say Gears’ falls into? 

1 hour ago, Kynedath said:

Initially I thought it was suspicious that Matrim sided with Sart so quickly against Striker, but on further reflection it makes sense considering they were confused about what Striker was saying. Sarts analysis would have swayed them real easy and clarified things for them. What makes me pause now is how they said that they understood when they really didn't. This actually makes me trust them a bit more since instead of bringing it back up to the thread they could have asked fellow eliminators to clarify things for them when they were back in the doc.

I like this. Feels extremely village. I don’t necessarily agree - there are times when an elim might be more likely to ask about something in their doc but I don’t think this was one of those times - but it’s a really natural progression of thought. 

@Kynedath what’s your conclusion on Matrim, then? You were suspicious of him and then trusted him - did those equal out into a neutral read? Are you leaning village on him? 

My vote is staying where it is for the moment, since Matrim’s explanation wasn’t especially convincing to me. There isn’t any further information I can get there, but... @Matrim's Dice what do you think of Gears being the top lynch candidate right now? What’s your own read on him? 

[Araris Valerian he/him]

Here's a vote tally:

TJ (0): Elbereth1
Joe (1): Ventyl1
Ventyl (1): Araris1, Elbereth2
Gears (2): Striker1, Orlok1
Elbereth (1): Gears1
Striker (2): Sart1, Matrim1
Matrim (1): Elbereth3

So currently up for lynch are Ventyl, Gears, and Striker. However, I doubt that Matrim is going to leave his vote where it is. Ventyl's vote is a poke vote, so Joe doesn't really have any pressure on him. I also don't think either of the votes on Gears are that likely to stick. It would be nice if more that a third of the players could vote.

I'm pretty fine with any of the current candidates for the lynch, but I'll be looking to see if there's someone better than Ventyl tomorrow.

I'd also say that of all the votes, Sart's seems the least likely to be distancing IMO (so Elim!Sart + Elim!Striker is probably not a thing), and Matrim comes across as fairly village in his interactions with Striker as well.

Edit: 

3 hours ago, Elbereth said:

My vote is staying where it is for the moment, since Matrim’s explanation wasn’t especially convincing to me. There isn’t any further information I can get there, but... @Matrim's Dice what do you think of Gears being the top lynch candidate right now? What’s your own read on him? 

Could you clarify? Your vote is on Ventyl (unless I missed something), who isn't involved in the discussion about Striker. Also, Gears is a top lynch candidate, rather than the singular target. Although I do feel like the votes on him are a little more likely to stick than the others, since they come from Striker and Orlok.

Edit 2: I guess Ventyl is not actually up for the lynch.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Araris Valerian

[theTruthshaper]

This is a lot on information to take in, but:

Gears: This is almost exactly how they acted in QF45, except for the changed opinion on poke votes. However, that could be due to the increased length of the game.They were suspicious of Elbereth but did not want to vote. However, were later convinced by Elbereth, Orlok and Araris.

Elbereth: The voting is suspicious, but maybe only because I dislike such random voting. While the argument for random voting appears to be accurate, it really leads to a case of privileging the hypothesis. Once you have everybody's attention upon a person, they become much easier to lynch.

Ventyl: Why did you ~sort of~ roleclaim? Especially this early? After so many people warned against it?

StrikerEZ: They claimed that Ventyl's roleclaiming was NAI, which is possible. Then, voted for Gears claiming that Gears is trying to spread paranoia. 

Orlok: They pushed people to vote even on small suspicions. I disagree with this as waiting clearly helps village; it allows for a clearer frame of mind and prevents random vote trains from forming. They voted for Gears, because of a pre-written role analysis post, saying that this allows for easy swaying of opinions.

Araris: They randomly (from my POV) decided to kill Ventyl. They have given no explanation for this.

Devotary: They only talked about how the Surges would interact with the gameplay. There is no accusation or defense of anyone.

Sart: They voted for StrikerEZ as they felt the discussion about Adhesion/Transportation was a distraction.

Matrim: They warned that Ventyl's roleclaim could be an elim tactic. It feels too transparent for an elim, but this still is a valid concern. They got very confused about StrikerEZ and thus was convinced by Sart.

Ashbringer: Basically the same as Devotary. They also were suspicious of Ventyl as Ventyl had tricked them in a similar manner last LG.

Lahilt: One post. They state opinion of poke voting.

Pyromancer: Very few posts. They were pushing a Gear lynch to Kynedath.

Kynedath: One post, no particular reads.

 

I really dislike the current voting trends. None of the votes fell like they have much reason behind them, and are mostly reflections of very weak suspicions/differences of opinion. I am mostly suspicious of Aranis seeing that they have give no explanation for their Ventyl lynch.

Edited July 2, 2020 by The_Truthwatcher