Jump to content

little wilson

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2831

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 Content Type 

Everything posted by little wilson

  1. little wilson
    @Arraenae Reverse Harem. Oh my word. Maill, no. I'm not your slave either. I'd say you have a death wish, but that's obvious.
  2. little wilson
    We meet in evenings. 7:00. I work full-time and can't meet anytime before 5:30-6. I know a few others work as well and can't meet much earlier.
  3. little wilson
    So you're saying any male can create a PM titled "[male's name]'s Harem" and lay claim to whichever females he wants? How comforting. >>
  4. little wilson
    Oh fine. I'll vote for a "random" player for your plan. Aman. I am not, nor will ever be, part of your harem. Take that.
  5. little wilson
    Fifth works for me.
  6. little wilson
    I like my semantics.
  7. little wilson
    Two votes on a person does not a bandwagon make. Just because you say that your vote is a bandwagon second vote doesn't mean that a bandwagon has actually formed, and the only votes that were even on him were from you and your brother. That's not a bandwagon. So there was no "counter bandwagon." The only bandwagon that has happened today has been on you. That's it.
  8. little wilson
    Yeah, that right there is the reason why neutrals help the eliminators. If the village doesn't care about keeping them alive and actively threatens them, why in the world would they ever want to help the village?
  9. little wilson
    On this here Turn 4 of Generation 9, on action 2, House Wilson will be marrying it's daughter, Elesha, into House Tekiel, to marry Locke. In return, it will be accepting Livia Tekiel to marry the Wilson heir, Ohrek. These be felicitous times, filled with celebration and delight. Marriage all around!
  10. little wilson
    I have no reason to keep a secret kill list. I don't hold grudges. It's not my place to share who keeps a kill list. Plus, some of them don't call it kill lists, even though shortlist of people who you want to kill in a future game is totally a kill list. Oh, wait, I take back what I said: there is still one person I want to kill, and I should fess up to it since I admitted as such in a group PM last night. Burnt, for LG12, since being the lynchpin in a love triangle with two other players with a high death rate made for an enormously stressful month, and she had to come along and stab me in the back (literally) on the last turn of the game, killing me and my lovers when we were so close to doing the impossible. Killing her once will make me feel a little better about that death. I'm sure she won't mind.
  11. little wilson
    False. I deleted the kill list a year ago. There are plenty of other players who keep a kill list though.
  12. little wilson
    I've had it for over a year a now, and fortunately, it's not just me working on it. There are many others with access to it. I'm willing to give anyone editing privileges to it, so long as i get an email so I can share it (I like to know who's making edits to it and I can't get that if anonymous users can edit). But yes, it's rather useful.
  13. little wilson
    I'm not sure where straw is getting that data, because the evidence points elsewhere. Out of the 24 players that have played their first game since the last anniversary game (not counting the AG), 13 of them joined on LG's, so I rather think people are more likely to join for LG's. #spreadsheet #dataisfun (The link to the SE spreadsheet with all of that data can be found on my profile, btw, if anyone is curious about it)
  14. little wilson
    Silverblade's not new. He was a pinch hitter in LG 12, and he played LG 18, MR 12, and QF 14. So this is his 5th game.
  15. little wilson
    I spent more time talking about Len because I disagreed with a lot of what he was saying. I find them both suspicious, but between the two of them, I would feel more comfortable lynching Emerald. I think his actions make more sense from an eliminator standpoint, whereas Len's could come from a villager, so I'd prefer to watch Len to see what he does next and then make up my mind about him. Also, as for exactly why I'd vote for Emerald. It comes down to these two posts. Please note the time stamp on them. An hour and ten minutes apart. Also, please note the people pinged in the first one versus the people pinged in the second. Every person in the second was in the first one. The first one that was posted an hour prior. That's hardly time for someone to respond. Sure, the second post's players had all been online in the last 8 hours, but just because they're online doesn't mean they can post. I keep up with the thread when I'm at work with my phone generally (sometimes with my computer, but that's less often), so I'm checking the site but I'm not in a position to post, nor will I unless it's absolutely necessary for me to say something, and then I'll post a couple lines. I keep up with the thread because I don't want to have to catch up on 6 pages of thread to be able to post when I finally have the time. To me, it feels like the second post came about because he wanted to be useful to make people think he was good, so he made a post almost identical to one he'd made an hour earlier, but different enough to seem like new information so it looks, on the surface, like he's being helpful. But it's not. It actually looks more like someone saying "Hey look at these people! They still haven't posted" so we don't look at him. So yeah. It's not enough for me to vote for him, but if I were forced to vote for someone, I'd go for him because he's my strongest suspicion.
  16. little wilson
    You seriously over estimate my speed at composing my essays. The Lynch Maill essay in MR4 took me about 5 hours to put together. No joke. In fact, I might be underestimating that, since it was over a year and a half ago. Suffice it to say that they are works of art, filled with quotes, links, analysis, and logic. Not something I can do in an hour. Can't I be right once? I believe that is par for the course with Stink, so I wouldn't read too terribly much into that. Emerald's not tunneling. He's making an accusation: I see nothing in that post to indicate a tunnel. I see someone pointing out something suspicious and calling the person out on what they saw. He's not saying that Elenion must be evil. He's not refusing to listen to anything Elenion says. What Emerald is doing is not tunneling. (Note: this doesn't mean that I don't think Emerald has been a little suspicious. On the contrary, I do. I think he's using the idea of getting lurkers and others who haven't posted yet to start posting by pinging them as a way to make it seem like he's useful to the village and therefore must be village. It's something that reminds me distinctly of people who post quick links and only quick links. It looks helpful on the surface, but it's not actually at all). Moving on to Elenion himself. I don't particularly find anything suspicious with the bandwagon vote. For me, it's the comments that Kipper pointed out about how he's never been an eliminator and all the other joking he did about alignments. I can absolutely see why someone would get an eliminator read from that, Kipper in particular. I'm not at all surprised that Kipper voted for Elenion based on those comments. It reads like a first-time eliminator trying to get people not to look at him because "I've never been an eliminator! I couldn't be an eliminator now!" Nope, sorry, you could. We used to have a player here by the name of Jain (his member name is Lightsworn Panda but all of his characters were always named Jain). Now, Jain played 11 games before he was finally evil on his 12th game. By about game 5-6, he started making frustration posts about "VILLAGE AGAIN!!! WHY?!?!?!" for his first post in the game. By 10-11, he wasn't doing them quite as vocally. Well, game 12 rolled around, and he was finally evil. He made that post again. He was killed for it. And rightly so. Declaring your innocence by saying that you've never been evil is not a way to declare your innocence. It's by doing things to show that you're innocent. That you're village. Of which, Elenion has done virtually none. Fine, he's claiming that he's acting the same way as MR15, but guess what? A good eliminator acts the same way as they always act. In LG20, Deathclutch listed off 6 reasons as to why I had to be evil. All of his reasons weren't alignment indicative for me at all, and the people who had played with me and knew that defended me against him and he ended up getting lynched instead. But guess what? I was actually evil. I was just playing like I usually do when I'm good. But anyway, let's look at his first defense: Do you want to know what I think of when I see someone use evidence of their previous games to prove why they must be good now? I think that that person wants you to think they are good, but aren't willing to actually do anything in this game to prove it. They want to ride off of their actions in the previous game. Sorry, doesn't fly for me. I want proof now. I want actions now. I don't care what you did then. Then isn't now. I will not accept anything from MR15 or virtually any other game as a reason for your alignment in this game. Post-"defense" the only vote that strikes me as even possibly off is Lopen's, but I'm not even sure about that. Kipper had mentioned a bandwagon, other people had also mentioned it, and Lopen threw his vote onto it. To my recollection (though I could be wrong about this), Lopen isn't opposed to supported bandwagons unlike some players, so him contributing to it doesn't really mean much. I'd bet that he also found Elenion suspicious and didn't care to elaborate because so many others had already said basically the same thing. Or maybe he did it as a joke, knowing that there's still over 24 hours left in the turn, which is plenty of time to retract a vote. Because of this, I don't really mind Lopen's vote. Elenion's conspiracy theory is mostly nonsense. Onto his counter plan. You're what I call uber-aggressive. Aggression in these games is just fine. Uber-aggression gets out of hand and makes people stop having fun, regardless of their alignment. You can ask for solid evidence to be presented, but you're not really going to find anything on the first day. So calling for it won't really help. The best people can do is exactly what I'm doing right now: analyze your posts to try to find your motivation. (Hint: your motivation isn't looking very villagery to me right now). Oh, and good luck getting people not to gut read or vote on those gut reads. There are many players who solely use their gut to vote in these games. And your demands for them to stop will not endear you to them. In fact, it's more likely to get you killed faster. Just saying. Ties back to the aggression: no one likes an aggressive person who demands everyone obey/listen/follow them. We're all intelligent players who are perfectly capable of making our own decisions. Um. And that's supposed to support your alignment how? There are no safe roles in this game, to my knowledge. Any known role can be held by any faction and any alignment, so you roleclaiming hardly makes you certain to be a villager. It just means that you're claiming to be a role and if you can support it, that you are that role. Only a Dula can know your alignment, after checking it. And if you are a Dula, that still doesn't guarantee your alignment, even if you think it does. And if you're wondering why an eliminator team would have a Dula on it, the answer is for that very reason: Because people don't expect the alignment scanner to be evil--why would they be? So they trust the alignment scanner. You make the alignment scanner evil, and all the villagers trust them. And yes, I've seen a game on this very forum where the alignment scanner was evil. In fact, I encouraged the GM to run with the distribution that made the alignment scanner evil. So no role is safe. You roleclaiming will not help you. All it will do is make you look like you really want people to trust you and think you're good. But why does any villager need to make people think they're good? If you're good, won't your motivations and what you're doing prove that in the end? You shouldn't need to go declaring it in the thread at the top of your lungs. Note: I'm not saying that if you're good you can't defend yourself from accusations. On the contrary, I've been known to fight tooth and nail against unfair accusations when I'm good. The difference is your motivation. Are you doing it to defend yourself against an incorrect accusation or are you doing it to make everyone think you're good? One motivation is a villager motivation. The other isn't really. Not that it's inherently evil, but it's definitely used by more eliminators than by villagers. The final consensus should always be educated? So are you saying that if there's suspicion against a player, but no solid evidence against them, but 5 or so players have all expressed strong gut reads on them, and no one else is up for the lynch, you'd say that we shouldn't be lynching that person? If so, I strongly disagree. Usually, if multiple players have a strong gut read about someone, even if they have no evidence for it, there's usually a reason for that gut read. Does that mean that the person is always evil? No. But I think there's a higher chance for them to be evil than there is for them to be good, and if they're good, they're probably doing something different that game that's the reason why they're gathering suspicion. Regardless, eliminators have been caught and killed for fluke things in the past. No real evidence against them. The most recent examples I can think of are from LG22 with Sart and Gunshy. Killed Day 1 and Day 2 respectively, for reasons that amounted to semantics, basically. Are semantics strong evidence? Heavens no. I'm still a little surprised that they got lynched for the reasons they were lynched for, even if it was right. The semantic evidence against them was a good start for evidence. Not a good ending point. But regardless, it happened, and those types of lynches will continue to happen. Strong evidence is a commodity you don't usually come by until mid-game unless you're lucky. But the village can't exactly wait for the strong evidence to be gathered before lynching. See, the lynch and the discussion surrounding the lynch are the villages best way of collecting evidence and finding eliminators. Even if you mislynch, those paying attention will gain information from the discussion. And as the game progresses, the evidence builds up until finally, someone has a good case against another player, based purely on things they've said. But if you wait to lynch, the discussion loses it's power, because there's no reason why someone should talk or make their opinions really known. It's not like they're going to die if they don't speak their mind. So how do you get people to really make their opinions known? The lynch. Voting. Seeing who jumps to support who and how and how quick they do so. Seeing who accuses them. It's that that gets your thoughts out there. You can't get that if there's not a lynch. Which means that you can't collect that evidence against people. Which means that your "strong evidence" is from roles or eliminators just blatantly screwing up. Eliminators don't often screw up that blatantly. It's usually other things that catch them, if they get caught at all. And counting on a role to help you out is a recipe for disaster. For example, we can say "Let's wait for the Dula to scan an eliminator," but what if there's no Dula this game? Or what if the Dula is evil? What if the Dula dies early? Any number of things can go wrong with relying on a role or a couple of roles. Plus, the game loses its fun. No one wants to play a game if there's only 1-2 people who actually matter and everyone else is forced to listen to them or be considered evil. That's a dictatorship. I don't play Follow the Cop games, and a lot of other people don't either. ---- TL;DR version: Elenion is using evidence from past games to try to show his alignment this game, even though a good eliminator will act exactly the same from game to game. His motivation for a lot of the things he's saying seems to be "Let's get people to think I'm good" rather than a villager just being good and trying to figure things out. None of this is inherently evil, but it is something that will make me watch him very closely. Emerald isn't saying much, but he's trying to appear useful by getting others to speak. I will withhold my vote for now. If I were to vote, however, it would be on Emerald.
  17. little wilson
    You would know.
  18. little wilson
    Just because you're an eliminator doesn't mean you have a web of lies. There's such a thing as a mostly-honest eliminator.
  19. little wilson
    Orlok, most lynch analysis doesn't happen in the night immediately following. It happens in the day lynch discussion/analysis and PMs. Sometimes it happens days/nights later. So I don't think it's terribly bad for a "loud voice" (since you don't have to be "experienced" to analyze a lot) to be arrested for 24 hours. It's protecting them until the day when there's a lot more time to discuss. Additionally, some players are just generally quieter during the night. I usually am, because I don't like to draw even more attention toward me than I'm typically likely to get. I will say right now that I have no intention of making a single post in the thread this coming night. Why? Because if I post, I let the eliminators know that I'm not arrested and therefore they can target me. If I don't post, they have to wonder: is she arrested? Or is she open? They don't know. It's sort of like not telling people your role even if you're just a vanilla villager. If everyone but one person posts, the eliminators know exactly who is arrested. Moving on though, I'd agree that if the Legionnaire has someone they suspect, they should arrest that person, since it does stop them from using that action and if they're an eliminator, it cuts them out of the doc for discussion. Even better if that person is a strategist/manipulator/information-gatherer. The more active the player, the more damage arresting them will do, because they won't be able to talk. Let's say that Maill is evil and someone roleclaims Dula to him right as the day ends, and then he gets arrested and can't tell his team about that claim? His team will be running off of outdated information for the kill. They really should kill the Dula, but they don't know about the Dula and won't until the night is over and Maill can talk again. (Sorry, Maill. Using you as an example because you're the one most likely to get claims like that) So if you have someone you suspect, arrest them. If you don't, go for an active strategist/manipulator/information-gatherer. Go for an active, talkative player. If they're a villager, there's no harm done for them and you'll be able to talk to them and perhaps come to trust them more, as Aman was suggesting. If they're an eliminator, you've just removed a heavy hitter from their team on a critical turn--the night, when they plan out the kills and other role actions. You've just cut off their ability to use their own action. Depending on who it is, you might be removing the leader of their team. So they'll be running around with their head cut off until their leader returns. Who knows what mistakes could be made? Note: all of the above is made on the assumption that there is an eliminator team starting with more than one player on it. Which, as we all know, may or may not be the case. I feel it safer to assume that it is the case.
  20. little wilson
    I know someone who's like a verdant meadow filled with frolicking puppies who will still accept this alignment despite your position to such opposition. In other news, I have no idea how to strategize for this game. I've no idea what I'm up against. This is....problematic...to say the least. And yes, yes, I know that in standard elimination games, you don't know exactly what you're up against, but you can usually approximate the number of evils. This is not a luxury to be had in this game. I didn't realize how painful that was going to be when I signed up. Thanks, Malv, for manipulating me into that. Much appreciated. Malv = The BROTP of Maill and Alv
  21. little wilson
    Bottom of the list is where the fun's at. Just sayin'. You're missing out.
  22. little wilson
    It's about time this thread gets locked up (only a month over due...no big deal. ).This was a fun game to watch, with it being a triquel to LG10/LG14. It's been fascinating to watch the variations of this game. The meta roles were a little iffy at times, but I think a couple of them (the Puppet Master and the Lifeless Commander in particular) showed quite a lot of promise. I'm amused that once again, Aman was an outed eliminator who didn't die (when will this stop happening, I wonder?). All-in-all, it was a good game, if a just a little bit broken. Congrats to the eliminators on getting through without losing a single starting teammate. Congrats to Sheep for unintentionally suiciding as Hoid. As always, if anyone would like to try your hand at running a game, just get a hold of Gamma, Meta, Alvron, or myself. Not only will we get you added to the list, but we'll be more than willing to help out in any way we can. You can also post game ideas, ask questions, and get feedback from everyone over in our Art of Game Creation thread too. With all the games that we've run so far, we have plenty of experienced GMs that can help you refine any game you're working on. Thanks again to everyone who played and we look forward to killing seeing you in future games!
  23. little wilson
    Sorry about the state capital one for the non-Americans. 90% of the geography-based questions I've asked have been international and I wanted to mix it up from my norm. Thought 7 would be manageable since there are so many western/mid-western states and over half of them are well-known internationally. @Slowswift You're up, since you got 7 (and you were right!)
  24. little wilson
    I could let this wait a little longer, but since no one has even attempted to answer part of it, any 8 of the below would've worked: John Adams Thomas Jefferson James Madison James Monroe John Quincy Adams Andrew Jackson Martin Van Buren William Henry Harrison John Tyler James K. Polk Zachary Taylor Millard Fillmore Franklin Pierce James Buchanan Let's try something easier now. WLIU, name 7 US state capitals west of the Mississippi (and east of the International Dateline) Note: Minnesota and Louisiana's capitals are east of the Mississippi (barely), so those will not count.
  25. little wilson
    @Ecthelion III My comments on the Vengeance Pact: Safe Roles My first suggestion is to make the rules as neutral as you can. You can keep in mind that you won't be giving a couple roles to eliminators, but putting it in the rules makes it really easy to exploit the safe role. And while you've got things in place for a mayor to die easily, all of that's contingent on the assassin killing that person. If the mayor is the Highprince of War, well, obviously the Assassin will kill them, because War is one of the biggest threats to them (the other being a Shardblade). But why would War reveal themselves when their ability is only of use to kill the Assassin and the Assassin can kill them no matter what? They wouldn't. So that leaves Information. And Information isn't a threat to the Assassin. The Assassin shows up as Alethi to Information. So they don't really have any reason to kill the mayor. This leaves the mayor as threat to only the Parshendi. Can the Parshendi kill him? Unlikely. Which leads me to the next bit. Protection Items/Roles Food, Foreign Affairs, Law, Guardian, Shardplate, Iron Sword, Half-Shard Shield, Dueling Sword. All of these keep the person targeted by the Parshendi from dying. These means that the Parshendi will have bloody hard time at killing their chosen targets. Want to know what makes it even worse? Protections That Kill Iron Sword. So now not only do the Parshendi have trouble killing their target, but they also have to worry about dying because they tried to kill someone. Now, you might think that because it's one-use for each item (after all, the person protecting the target dies), but it doesn't help much. See, the Parshendi start with a very limited number on their team. Every teammate lost makes it harder to win the game, which is the case for the villagers too, but it means a lot more to the eliminators, who start with significantly less players. In a 25 player game with 5 eliminators, 1 village death is only 5% of the village team but 1 eliminator death is 20% of their team. That means every death needs to count. Now, you could say that they need to kill everyone, so the fact that someone is dying gets them closer to their win con. But I don't know about you, but I'd rather kill the Highprince of Information than a Darkeyes with an Iron Sword, even if I'd have to kill the Darkeyes eventually. Information is more of a threat. And that's the thing. Priorities. Some people/roles will be a higher priority kill than others, and those higher priority targets are usually better protected. Ways to Kill Assassin, Pickpocket, Shardblade, Iron Sword, Dead Man's Switch. Some of these are more problematic than others, obviously, and all of them are things that are going to cause issues for the Parshendi. While none of them inherently target the Parshendi, I think you'll find that the Parshendi will have more problems dealing with the kills than the Alethi or the Assassin. After all, nothing can kill the Assassin except for War or a Shardblade. And the Alethi don't have to worry as much about the Dead Man's Switch or the Iron Sword unless they have a vigilante Shardblade-wielder. Point is, the Parshendi will have a much bigger problem with the kill items and roles than the other alignments, which is a problem. Other Potential Issues Highprince of Commerce: This reminds me a lot of LG10 and Endowment. Someone having a list of people that certainly contains an eliminator. This usually ends poorly. I could potentially see Commerce just going "Hey guys, I'm Commerce, and here's the four people on my list" and then the village just killing them one by one until they find the eliminator. Highprince of Judiciary Administration: This person is highly unlikely to choose an impartial group that will actually listen to the defendant. Instead, they will choose 4 others who are as convinced as they are of the person's guilt. The idea of holding a mini-trial is a great idea, but it wouldn't work like this, because it won't impartial. Those judges will not listen to any defense provided. They've already made up their mind or JA wouldn't have chosen them for the trial. Any defendant is highly unlikely to be found not guilty. Party Invitation: Should probably be a Rare Item, since roleblocking is actually a fairly powerful tool and there are other roleblocking roles in the game. Plus, since anyone who accepts a bribe from Finance gets a random Common item, it makes it likely that there will be a few invitations running around during a game. The current version of the game still has some rather major balance issues. Any individual issue by itself wouldn't be that bad. Protect-kills are perfectly viable. It's just that the combination of all of these makes it really difficult for the eliminators to have a shot, since that's a lot to overcome.
×
×
  • Create New...