Kasimir

@Stick. Odds that RBM's pair is V/V? Keep in mind if one is dead, 50% shot the other is dead too. That's a risky distro for a V/E pair or E/E pair though not impossible. Am considering if worth just asking RBM to jebiga here.

I am pretty sure Forsaken can't, you are thinking of Darkfriends here unless this is meant to be a multi-role game???

Help me with what you're thinking? On my part I'm just still sort of in the ehhhh place but this wants to make me do a re-read of the QF real quick as a comparator. I should add that in addition to LG99, they also did not vote to save themselves with Cash in QF71, which we just came off. Voting with Cash would've at least made it a 50/50 and potentially split the vote and would not have seemed sus, since it was self-pres. Basically I'm saying E!Bee is not really about self-pres. @Stick. As an addendum I have thought more about it and while I can't deny it's making me still side-eye you, I'm trying to bracket it as I'm concerned I'm doing a Drake on you where I kinda tacitly sussed him from Araris's RP game. If it matters and the suspicion doesn't go away, I'll bring it up later on. Otherwise I kind of feel bringing it up in thread (key word) right now is a bit of a distraction. Why would you be voted out for that? Conversely, if you didn't bother to read through, how could you confidently say he's not that suspicious?

To be clear I apathy-cleared E!Bee for not voting in self-defense. NOPE. Response to your q when not hopping trains and off mobile

NOPE. I used it to apathy clear in LG99 and was wrong. Not remotely buying. Bee

I can't deny that's a motivating factor but in general E!you knows and abuses the fact I never really want to exe you until the evidence is screaming at me in the face so it's not like this was particularly new. Fair, but I feel that puts us in a "we can't make distro speculation without full sight of distro" position which I commonly chant at Mat anyway Like...the problem here is that if we're not playing with a full Village-only roster, and I already mentioned my doubts about the ta'averen all being in because we get 1/3 free clears, then we're not looking necessarily at those kinds of power levels. Edited to add: Tallybot agrees with this, just for the record. Edited to add 2: Tbh @Araris Valerian my current take on you is "I won't help you kill him." It's very much a null sort of space because I don't fundamentally disagree with Mat's reaction. I just think that E!you would park more subtly as you tend to do.

Edited to add 4 aka Will I Be Ninjaed Chicken: @Mat Here's some digging I did to substantiate what I mean a little. Drawing from QF71 first because it's closest on my mind. V!Aet Not first post - QF71 C1 is 7 pages so I am doing a selection, but this is a tactical comment worth highlighting because Aet follows it up IMO with a useful subsequent call to discussion: Here, on the central mech. Calls for more engagement. Global readslist, which identifies Aet's thoughts and reasons for some reads quoting exchanges. Interacts with players he cannot read. I know Neil would say #selfmeta but it's worth noting Aet acknowledges the meta difference. The extent to which he can overcome it is the question here IMO. Even more engagement with one-off players. Even more engagement/thought. Skipping a bunch of tactical posts to go to this exchange here which starts with: Engages with other players seriously to understand views and converge on an exe target that makes sense. Cites posts in defense of Weaver to me when I ask given I sus Weaver. Genuine sense Aet is trying to sensemake here. tldr; I'm not saying there should be no difference - again, Aet has cited circumstances that might make a difference so I'm not necessarily sold on this train, but IMO this is just selective (rather than all!) posts from C1 and the rest of Aet's game was in this vein. It all points to a thoughtful discussion-driver player, and Aet is taking a backseat here in comparison. E!Aet Pretty much a meme/nothing opening. Selectively reactive. Spores/rules comment. Pushing TJ for aggression. Banter. That's D1. I don't recall Aet getting much more active in this LG, and while it's small enough to scroll through the rest, I definitely don't feel there's much of a difference here that I noted. I took all of Aet's D1 posts, btw. TAKEAWAY: I'd argue current Aet is sort of an in-between point. Not really engaged but not obviously hiding the way E!Aet was. I currently E!lean but it's not strong - my contention here is that E!Aet probably would be required to make some form of thread presence because any kind of passivity would get him killed after his QF performance and he's aware of it. But I could also genuinely see V!Aet just being too busy to get into things. As I said, I certainly was there. The re-read is making me also okay with going for RBM. RBM is in another weird meta place for me but it's just a bit similar to where I ended up on RBM mentally in Drake's QF - not doing things E!them did, not quite, but also not really doing things V!them did. Edit because I did in fact get ninjaed by Mat K I'll be honest it's not an E!Aeo point. She asked me why I was aggravated - my response is that this is a pet peeve. I don't take it to be AI and tbh I'm okay with V!Aeo for now. I was not so happy with her early game, but she's entered and for me, that's something I'm fine running with for now. Remind me then and I'll tell you! If it makes you more curious/helps jog my memory several months from now, I'll note it's actually a similar thing to what E!TUA does and what I was looking for last game from him. Rough thoughts atm: -Ok with V!Mat, V!Aeo -? on Stick, Araris -Not voting CadCom D1 -Squint on Aet, RBM -Need more from Wierdo but also understand Wierdo's difficulties (QF71 stuff.) If there's anyone else I forgot, you go right into squint for me forgetting you existed though tbh this line of reasoning is less compelling when I'm checking in between classes. Edited to add WHATEVER: ACTUALLY. @Araris Valerian Given the last iteration involved a Vorros/Devo - BM/Forsaken team and Devo and you 1v1ing in weaves, is there a reason you think this is not actually balanced? 2 channellers IMO gives the Elims free access to linking, which creates more problems depending on their stats, e.g. fireball. You could certainly argue TKN probably ensured their collective stats don't do this, but giving Elims free linking next to Forsaken auto-weave success still feels like a power upgrade to me I'm not confident would exist. Final edit I promise: If there's a way to prove our three ta'averen near endgame, I think this is worth going for with a mass claim, in asterisks. I don't really believe we will be so lucky as to get them all as it'd be what, a 1/3 autoclear in this game population? But nevertheless, getting an autoclear is still helpful for us. I broke my promise EDIT: Wrt the Araris @ - the point I am driving at is that linking and auto-success with a decent compulsion risk appetite or even just making a single compulsion weave in the Day as the other Evil channeller means that you get a free potentially killing or still annoying weave at Night e.g. a Shield or whatnot via linking and the ability to confirm that one succeeds. To me, that suggests way more volatility in a 9 player game. That's kind of weird to me, hence that feels like a distro view that doesn't make sense. Consider that Compulsion is complexity 3, meaning that it can automatically succeed as long as it is the only weave you do in the day. That kind of bites against your 'force the Forsaken to burn an auto success' point tbh. Sure, they don't get physical actions but lbr, what physical action was an E!channeller gonna use in the Day anyway??? (There's possibly a play here about mass PMing to block that off which is not the worst but I also kind of think it has implications for any physical role. YMMV on whether that's worth it.)

Edited to add: I mean sure I'll give you another freebie behind why I feel Aeo's confidence is eyebrow-raising: So this argues I'm E/E with Araris, having set out to defend Araris in thread and then decided halfway through to half-take it back by going back to sussing Araris on zero provocation with Araris having attracted exactly zero votes apart from a mid comment from Mat. This is an insanely bad picture of the game. It's incoherent on the face of it because it requires I both deliberately set out to tie myself tightly to Araris and then immediately realise it is a mistake and distance in a halfarsed way without remotely thinking through where ambivalence looks. So it assumes I am making posts in a deliberative way (cf. Stick's comment on distance and commentary) but also that...I'm not. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. Bringing up the fact law class is killing me as an excuse doesn't wash away the fundamental contradiction in your assumptions. Also side-eyeing Stick here for ignoring an explicit part of my E!play she's mentioned before. Would be comfortable with a vote there. (This is just to say that if you've used it as a spec to clear me before, then I question why you have conveniently forgotten it here.) I'm not even bothering to bring up Araris's Elim doctrine here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm mostly on Aet because I feel Aet isn't really in gear here compared to his thread-driver role in Drake's QF but acknowledge it's a borderline case given Aet's mentioned work. I don't feel I've gotten enough out of RBM to make a read and have also gotten RBM wrong before. @Wierdo What's your current take? There's a thing E!Mat does that I've not quite seen yet. I'm watching for it, but in any case, would not push CadCom or Mat D1. Not-seeing the E!Mat thing is making me believe V!Mat for now. With asterisks. Oh yeah for 'you're defending Araris' people: Have you considered the easiest, nobrainer defense here is "hey, Araris hasn't played in over a month and I am not in favour of C1ing him"? Edited to add 2: Yeah just explained it. Am on a class break rn so get to say more but essentially, Aet took a major role in thread solving and pushing in QF71. Right now, Aet kind of feels disengaged. I accept/appreciate Aet has work but I'd note that disengaged!Aet is synonymous based on my current experience with E!Aet. I agree you can also make that argument for me but I shrug and say it anyway - Aet was basically out of things in Sart's LG99 and on the ball in Drake's QF. The shift was visceral and helped a provisional V!read of Aet early on. I don't think, as a result of those games, Aet will ever be allowed to just sit on the sidelines in a game again, which is why I am in a ? place about Aet atm. Edited to add 3: I mean that's a you-thing I can't dispute your own Araris beliefs, and it's good to hear an explicit position on your part, but I do think that your set-up of it read more null than pointed, hence my question to Stick.

I fundamentally think the IKYK is worth looking at or being aware of at least ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ But YMMV.

Cannot believe I am saying this to you of all people. This is literally what the NK is for...c'mon... Since when do SE Elims aggressively thread control. Hasn't happened since peak Aman and even Archer trends opportunist when Evil.

I'm not defensive over Araris - I just detest it when people are arrogant over poor conclusions and also think you have a history of pushing reads with extreme confidence that are unwarranted. As I pointed out: You are welcome to demonstrate how a line of reasoning that it is inconsistent to ignore 90% of the rules and yet saying I don't know the rules gets off the ground. I'll wait. I can't really disagree with this since it's my known weakness with regard to reading players - I don't tend to just accept it on face value and then it bites me when it comes to newer players. The Forsaken's vote never counts. To cover this up, Araris is suggesting they will be forced to use a Compulsion weave to shift someone's vote to theirs, pushing the no-vote elsewhere. Since the Forsaken auto-succeeds on a weave of their choice, it's better for us to force them to burn it on Compulsion than other things. I don't disagree with this tactically because I would rather the auto-success be burned on Compulsion. But it does mean as a result of Araris's call that we are going to play IKYK with the missing vote later on - Forsaken or framed?

If a player's argument/view on another player washes to a null, I don't take that to be a negative case - citing that as a negative suggests you're not convinced by the nulling and yet you also want to cite it as your entire reason for your read. Doesn't make sense to me. I need to complain about this somewhere, I hate law, I don't understand why people think I'd love it, I love the higher level meta-legal debates and international law is mildly interesting with jus cogens and all that but I'm losing my SAN just trying to deal with statutes and subsections and sections and case law. It is the most anally retentive thing ever and exhausting and I complained to Wyrm and the bastard laughed at me and told me that I should love it because it's the same skillset as philosophy and I s2g I've done a Masters and reading David Chalmers at his most tendentious is nothing like reading dry case law and statutes were not written for human beings no freaking philosopher apart from Horkheimer writes this poorly I'm tired and done already and no I don't mind being exed D1 tbqh. Okay, so what are your conclusions? Someone remind me how anyone can be so confident with so little actual thinking :thinking: If I know that there's about 90% of the rules I didn't look at and didn't want to look at, I submit it is eminently reasonable to hold I don't know what the rules do. You may disagree - if so, then you are simply overconfident and did not read the rules as you claim you did. Certainly this is consistent with your takes! Araris is not a player you expect to get emotion off unless he tells you outright. Happy to learn how you have ostensibly played this long and still do not know this. In other words, an obviously ??? moment from Araris is IMO an invitation to try to extrapolate what made him do it. One explanation I considered is a Villager pounce, having done that before. I argue the first statement alone invalidates every single piece of post-reading you claim to be able to do - it doesn't work on Araris. Anyone who @s me about aggression, I hate it when people are overconfident but can't put up things to remotely support your confidence. You just come across as tacky and arrogant and I am thoroughly okay biting back. Edited to add: Oh yeah, @The Unknown Ajah - Aet. Feels 180 from Drake's QF.

Actually heck Araris if I'm right you played against an E!Vorros and E!Devo team so where that assumption come from?

Is there a reason we'd assume those roles are V!aligned? I seem to recall Vorros? whatever that dude's name was was Elim the last time. I think there was no Myderaal? AFAICT Amyrlin, Warder, and BM are all not alignment-guaranteed. Only our ta'averen are. Is there some reason you're attributing Mat with going for Araris when Mat himself is ambivalent? Edited to add: I'll phrase my sentences more differently at some point my brain is just tired and overflowing with law drek rn

Tempted to V lean Mat I need to stop being so easy

I will be very disappointed if you are not because TUA had one (1) chance to do something really funny I'm going back and forth about it on further reflection. I can empathise because I've had those times when another player does something, I fix on it and think it's Evil and then later think more and go "oh wait nvm" - Araris voting CadCom is consistent with that but I'm not really picking up anything else that feels like a Villager pouncing on a thing they saw.

But isn't the point to try to make a read, beyond the contradiction itself? Edited to add: Tempted to lean very mild V on Araris. Jumping on this feels just a bit like the sort of thing that comes from an overexcited Villager perspective. Mild because this is Araris and I don't trust myself to read Araris >>

Speak for yourself Weird. CadCom should be in of all people. I'll take a look again and try to fix the regex during my spare time. I'm actually more ? about Mat's defensiveness of CadCom here. I'd note CadCom's at least consistent in Amrylin Seat erasure: At the same time I'm curious about your theory of the gap, @Araris Valerian. Intuitively I'd expect the Forsaken to be hyperaware of the existence of the Amrylin, since it's kinda hard to ignore a role you scan as. Edited to add: @The Unknown Ajah, I've fixed the regex. It tracks CadCom as Cadmium. I've added CadCom as a valid vote.

Stick Wb sis U_U As the other person who helped vet the rules, I can also sympathise because I refused to touch it with a ten foot pole until Araris told me I didn't need to care about doublechecking weave interactions I still don't bloody know what the rules do and don't really have the time/energy to go over them until after law class ends but hey in theory the most important thing is Villagering right?

Have gone on record as saying being hostage to player numbers is not a good place for a game to be. Considering withdrawing though, as I'll be busy for the first two days. Not sure if that's a problem.

Araris and Mat huh. Okay fine I'm in

I was more confused because Pilot carts are really huge so I was surprised doubling them could still fit in the pen o_O Iridium Point Germany is a pretty generic stock nib, but that's helpful because we can rule out a lot of brands that would normally name their nib. This one could be a custom too I think, but not sure. Dw about being too new, it's just a rabbit hole thing. If you don't need to know then you don't. We all start somewhere. If it has a cartridge, then it's what we call a c/c or cartridge or converter model. (You either stab the cartridge, as you point out, or you get a refillable device we call a converter. Dw about the converter right now as well, you seem happy enough with the cartridges and not every converter fits every pen so that's a different headache.) Are there specific letters it stops on? e.g. when your pen is moving up, or when it is moving down? (upstroke, downstroke.) And does it feel 'smooth' when writing, or a bit scratchy? At this point I think in my head there's a few options but trying to narrow down on what might be the problem.

Welcome to the hobby! Don't have questions to add to Slowswift's and Coolmint's but IMO they're helpful for diagnosing what's going on. Why so?

I'm not super sure if I can or can't. Dealing with a second round of COVID so it's down to when this runs and all. Maybe keep me posted?