Kasimir

As you pointed out, I tend to/seem to just get negative vibes off you a lot. But I'm currently also thinking/working strictly in terms of taking out everyone I feel I have some, any small form of V!read on and working from there.

Alright, let's do this. Crude until I can get something else going. As in proper analysis. Sorry. But I at least want to get my thoughts in some semblance of order. This is pre-deep reading of C1. I will try to go back and do it, but I can't right now because I have to clear something else. <Wiz, Kas, Turtle, Bookwyrm, Ash, JNV, Silho, Xino> Taking myself out: <Wiz, Kas, Turtle, Bookwyrm, Ash, JNV, Silho, Xino> Very, very crude tiers: +: <Wiz, Turtle, Ash, Xino, JNV> ?: <Bookwyrm> -: <Silho> Bookwyrm has pressure, should probably unvote and go Silho, I'll go frown over this in the morning again as I'm scarred from the LG90 Silho tunnel.

Nope. Tents are not single-use items. Having a tent functionally makes a player a Lurcher. Sort of want to say Turtle resisting the EoD TUN CW is at least consistent with their views on TUN (null+), but I'm not sure if E!Turtle has incentive to switch anyway. But Turtle being so confused at EoD sort of feels genuine to me and I'm trying to work this out because E!Turtle must realise that if the TUN CW doesn't go through, they're the likely CW, as indicated by both my posts and Silho's posts. Just re-reading the chaos starting from here:

Archer did. But flipped without a tent, therefore cannot be him.

So, question for you. Who V!read Xino so strongly they would protect Xino D1 instead of themselves, or envision a NK on Xino? Did you? Edited to add: Because suppose you are a V!Lurcher. You have two jobs: -Protect people highly likely to be Villagers -> why not self-protect D1? Who else V!reads Xino so strongly they would've gone Xino over themselves? or -Protect the people most likely to be NKed -> again, why do you see that as being likely to be Xino? Odd call since Xino was blending in. Much more likely to be a self-protect. (We're ignoring WGG/WBG world - theoretically possible, but I lean against it.)

IMO worth just doing it for actions accountability but I also get it because that's a very distant endgame sort of problem and less useful for Mistborn maybe, IDK. There you go :eyes:

I asked Mat, he said they would if you flip with them. I can @ him here again to get that ruling in thread instead of my GM PM @Matrim's Dice

What do you mean a quokka @Matrim's Dice Can you confirm if you put any quokKas in this game? I... I have answered this so many times this hour I'm laugh-crying but okay no, it's a fair question. WBG = Wounded Buffalo Gambit. Polar opposite of WGG - Elims protect a Villager and hit the Villager and hope to sus the Villager for survival and let them get MLed. To be clear, I don't really think the pre-requisites for WBG obtain in this case. And I don't want to completely rule out WGG but I don't think it is that likely, so that's the view of the game I'm going to be running with going forward for now. But in a game, e.g. Tyrian ruleset where you can't protect the same target twice in a row, and you're setting up a WGG, how do you explain why the Elims hit X on N1 and then didn't come back for the guaranteed kill? The logical way to play it off is to claim that the Elims are clearly trying to get X lynched in a WBG variant.

I mean, if he'd said one Villager forgot to send in orders, that'd also have been my response :eyes:

So my issue with WGG when I really think it through (hi sorry y'all 4:30AM brain be like that ) is just this: I think in a three or two Elim game, the tent is likely to make an appearance one way or another. Too many potential kills in the game not to offer some protection. So either way, it's not prima facie surprising. WGG has always been off-meta. Which doesn't say anything about whether it can/can't happen, but the thing to keep in mind is that back when it was prevalent, Lurchers weren't restricted in targeting so there was an actual reason for Elims not re-targeting the WGG target. As Archer said in AG8, the issue with a WGG now is that you have to explain why the Elims didn't swing back to attack a target they know is vulnerable to attack. To me, that does place a bit more of a barrier in place of running one. You'd functionally have to turn it into a potential WBG instead and play on the uncertainty there instead. And according to @Matrim's Dice, we'd have known if TUN or Archer dropped with any items. Which means: Sigh everything in me is screaming not to do this which means this is probably a bad decision but hey Archer you can yell at me for hypocrisy when I'm dead. I think this is relevant insofar as we now know 1/2 the distro. One one-shot kill, one protect, and three regulars. I don't know what we can draw too strong an inference but that looks fairly roleslite to me. (Watch the other half have another tent, silver dust, and fenweed sap...) But it gets weirder. Suppose I keep my V!Ash, V!Xino credences. I certainly am not going to believe E!me because I'm not delusional If we're postulating Elims, then, by my credences, they're in the second half - the other five players. Where I'm still also postulating fenweed sap, silver dust, and another tent, along with a two or three man Elim team. Not impossible but it feels sort of crowded. Two man team world? Not sure.

@Ashbringer - Thoughts on kill profile analysis? Point taken from @Shining Silhouette, let's pathwalk. A. Archer was NKed, Xino Knife-Killed Feels like a threat kill team. The big question is IDing someone who would Knife Xino, though I know Xino's not universally V!read. I could see Shining doing this. Probably me, it's in my known Elim MO. Maaaaybe JNV. I'm not sure. I recall what JNV said about their NK doctrine, but JNV wasn't on for thirteen hours, so that doesn't seem to make sense. <Shining, Kas> IDK Ash's NK doctrine anymore. Maybe? Ash probably thinks I'm pocketable. Wiz was fine with a me NK so would probably be ok with Archer NK this game. I'd more or less assume that this team isn't secure in thread control. Which...let's be real, is a broad pool. Probably...let's see. Turtle, maybe. Bookwyrm, Xino, with a side of Shining? Yeah got it, I can't do kill profile analysis. Among other things. B. Archer was Knife-Killed, Xino NKed Here's the same problem, in inverse. An Elim team who NKs Xino is almost certainly a team that doesn't particularly fear thread control players. That would push me towards me, but that's not my kill doctrine. Probably Shining, Ash, JNV. Xino - realised it doesn't matter if Xino is or isn't V. WGG is risky in this game because you can't double protects, and there's only one way Xino could have survived a kill (either flavour), which means there is one player the Elims can kill without fear if he's Village. So this is a next cycle problem. Let's go back to the votes. We're lucky enough that we do have, circumstantially, two flips on key trains so we can form a picture of the Day, though I'd really rather have Archer alive. The relative stability all the way through EoD, where Turtle finally self-presed and most players didn't intervene makes me think we're looking at a case where the Elims felt fairly secure. Archer mentioned that he expected the Elims to have voted early in order not to forget, and then just stuck it there. I think <Ash, me, Turtle, Wiz, TUN, Xino, Shining> (just off p1, RIP that's basically nearly everyone) fits that category. Currently... ......... ....................... I don't like this >> It's sorta down to Turtle/Shining for me if I hold on to my Ash and Wiz credences, and leave Xino for some other time. But worth remembering that JNV parked their vote and went offline too, and didn't come back. JNV for the moment. I'll do more complete vote analysis for a V/V/V world later on. I need to finish my code. My main problem has been trying to identify someone who would feel so strongly about E!Xino that they'd use a oneshot on Xino on C1. And risk death. I am relooking D1 but I am not finding anyone who fits that category.

Tbf, I guess the Archer kill as a NK makes more sense to me. Something I was thinking about but never mentioned was that I expected Archer to have a Tent, because there's no real point in pushing for a provisional Village read otherwise - the Elims NK you, you die. I figured maybe he was trying to kill bait, so I didn't mention that. Either way, the prospect of a fairly V!read Archer seems anathema enough I'd expect an Elim kill on Archer, which is another reason why I thought the strat was kayana. I'd expect the Elims to have a negative assessment of MLing Archer after C1. Perhaps it's my own biases speaking because I sure wasn't surprised by my own N1 death in LG90. That's also why I think the knifer should claim if they're Village (well, an Elim wanting Village cred would have to claim too.) If they don't claim, we operate on the assumption they're Evil. This isn't a Coinshot game. The player has already lost the Silver Knife, see below: There's no reasonable world in which you don't claim. But I also do feel pulling the Knife out this early isn't a very Village move so IDK really. Plus the 50% chance of death if you kill a Crewmember, i.e. if you don't hit an Elim. Your odds increase closer to lylo. But maybe if you have fear of death... I don't presume Archer would've knifed Xino at least since he was V!reading Xino. But look, timestamps-wise: Then: Let's skip my TUN hop since nothing major happens and Archer is still in the lead. At forty-three minutes to rollover, I switch to Turtle, making it: TUN has swapped at some point, but IDK I find it as relevant and I'm not doing full vote analysis right now, so let's just ignore that. At fifteen minutes to rollover: Still tie. Which means whoever killed Archer had to be on in this window. (Ok, accepted again it could be a vig kill but if you want to be strict that we can't make this assumption, then this is still a line of investigation we should follow.) At nine minutes, Turtle self-preses by going onto Archer, breaking the tie. I don't want to super-litigate this, again, vote analysis later. But this means the kill happened in the nine minutes window, in my view. Elims do not want to waste the kill, and with the 50% chance of death if you are wrong, and the fact it's one-use, I can't see a knife-user blowing it away on a player who would have flipped anyway. Who was on in that window? Me, Shining, Turtle, Ash, Xino that I can think of. Archer is obvious. Ash mentioned seeing TUN at one point. Wiz was on as well. I suppose it's possible V!TUN decided to take out Archer? Shining, Turtle, and me I'd rule unlikely. We were too busy screaming and hopping in the window. Tracking that and putting in an appropriate kill is hard. @xinoehp512 - my counterpoint. You were detached enough from the thread to fit the profile of someone both present but disengaged enough to be able to make the kill, if so. Tbh, I'd consider it a bit of a troll distro. Because think about it - the 50% death chance can't be blocked ( @Matrim's Dice, I am correct about this, right?) and as an Elim, unless you have the numbers to WGG and hit a Shade, you are basically going to be hitting a Villager. You get a free kill at a 50% chance of losing a teammate in a game that is already kinda swingy due to volatility? It is...sorta possible, but also just weird because say you run a two man Elim team. You could go one man off the bat just from this stunt. Alternatively, three Elims plus a knife seems kind of OP because you get a free kill potentially if the protects fail. Huh. Wait. There are no Thugs in this game. So either Xino was self-protecting, or Xino was protected. I don't find it likely someone trusted Xino enough to protect him. Maybe Archer, but Archer had to realise he was a target. And I got a notif, lemme guess, I'm ninjaed >> @Matrim's Dice - One more question. Is the roleblock written as a protect? Or if the kill is roleblocked, it's not even mentioned? Edited to add: NVM DO NOT CLAIM DO NOT PASS GO DO NOT COLLECT $200 EDITED TO ADD 2: WAIT NO IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY KNIFED ARCHER PLS CLAIM TY

Hello, brother. I suppose I should stab you in the back sometime in good ol' Heron tradition then

Hang on guys, here's a question. The Elims killed Archer, didn't they? (We don't actually know this, since kills aren't differentiated. I guess there's a world in which Xino had a knife but...no, that's not coherent. Elim kill makes more sense, unless the knife-user was lucky. If you are a knife-user who stabbed Archer, please claim since it's one-use anyway.) But...Archer was slated to die until I did the last minute 'save Archer' swing. Which means the Elim who put in the kill was around at EoC. Xino, hello there :eyes:

Yes. You have one entry each.

i don't want u to die maybe??? i def don't want archer to die i don't want wiz to die there is no one left viable i can think off based off who here we can get numbers for except TUN

tldr; only likely cw we could get i was fine with if i wanted to stick with my current v lean on arch

TUN

ngl do you want to go back i shouldn't have my hackles this raised by self-pres but turtle's self-pres makes me feel bad & idk if we have the numbers.

ffs. ok, that'll do it.

So do you think Archer is Village or not? Because if he's E, aren't you exposing yourself to potential death anyway?

@Matrim's Dice yo Mat u look pretty v to me u wan go on2 turtle w/ me? :eyes: Ok, more seriously: @Turtle @Ashbringer @Shining Silhouette - Thoughts on piling onto TUN? Wiz is a non-starter for me and I can't see any other train that would currently handle the solid Archer train. Am happy to hear if you have a counter-proposal or if you think I should hold my E!Archer credences but I'm kind of leaning V on him after the last exchange, or at least less willing to be gung-ho, despite being aware of the third box problem.

LG79 - it's why I've pulled off, yes, though the multiboxing option is still looking awfully tempting :| That's what fundamentally throws me - that and 0.4 is just a little shy of a coinflip for an extra death. Ok, fair enough. Ngl I legit thought it was graph-related. Sounds reasonable to me, and makes me feel a bit better about going for Turtle tbh. Ok, also sounds reasonable. That and they might have to decide if they want a distancing PM. @The Bookwyrm

Okay. Let's do that thing. If Archer doesn't vote, there's a 40% chance he dies no matter what. If he's the lead train as well, this guarantees us a single casualty. As it is, we're looking at four worlds: AFAICT this is the simplified decision matrix. We know the IF filter odds. Lynching or not lynching Archer is within our control. This model ignores protect success and makes the pessimistic assumption silver dust is not so prevalent such that someone will always die. The obviously worst outcome is failing to lynch V!Archer in a world where V!Archer dies to the IF, because that gets us three Villager losses either way you slice it. The L sub-world is a little better than the ML sub-world, of course, since there is a dead Elim in that world. It's tempting to argue that since the outcomes are usually -2V or -2V/1E, we should really avoid the disastrous 3V box by ensuring a successful Archer lynch. You could argue this model fails because not all V casualties are equal and losing Archer =/= losing me for instance. It's a bad trade and we're better off losing V!me compared to V!Archer. I'm happy to agree with this argument but I dislike it being employed because I kind of don't think it's healthy for SE to think in terms of player value and that gets dark real fast when we move outside the very careful example I've selected so far. So I'm going to willfully ignore it. That being said, it really, really sits badly with me to want to just lynch a player regardless of their alignment or the fact I do get some V vibes off Archer's last post. TUN Turtle. I guess? I am ready to be convinced to move elsewhere or to change my mind another fifty times before rollover :| Can I buy anything with it though :eyes: Okay, fair enough.

AAs and SSs win individually This was brought to you by much confusion on my part >>