Kynedath

I apologize everyone, but some family matters have come up and I may need to retract a little bit of my activity in this game. I will do my best to keep up and to be involved, but I will be fairly inactive for the next day or two.

. . . That makes a lot of sense. Steeldancer. @Orlok Tsubodai May I ask how many others you PMed trying to persuade to vote on Drake? I didn't get one, but that makes sense because of my policy on D1 lynching. If it was only the few that have mentioned it, then I would ask why since it would seem like a random choice of individuals. But overall, it does make sense and it was a possibility that I should've seen earlier. I think this is good information to have. If what Steel says is true, then we have more ways to find eliminators, which is a good thing. In regards to giving the eliminators information, this may just be one of the only roles where that effect is mitigated. A passive ability which only affects the lynch results is the area which affects the eliminators the least. Not to say that the lynch is something they don't influence, that isn't the case at all, but they don't have the numbers to effectively change the lynch. And considering that this saves from vote manipulation, the eliminator team most likely would have had multiple potential targets to manipulate the votes, so it was a small chance to affect the game anyways. I see the benefit outweighing the information given to the eliminators. In any case, I will have to go back later on and look over everything again to solidify my own stance on my suspicions. Although I do think that LL's move was suspicious, I don't think that I have to vote on them because of the other two already doing so.

@Orlok Tsubodai, you're right that Steel was the one to turn the vote, but the way he did it makes no logical sense to me. With those specific conditions, there are multiple potential benefits from securing the lynch on a teammate. One such benefit would be to gain trust. If the eliminator team thought there was no way to save Drake since there was a bandwagon forming, then wouldn't their next best move be to maximize their benefit from that? Granted that is just one possibility, and a slim one at that, but one that is still possible. If he can provide an explanation as to why he would vote in the way he did with as little reasoning as he provides, then I would be more than willing to drop my vote and trust him a little more. But until then, he and Livinglegend have both bypassed all visible logic with their actions and I find that very suspicious. I can't imagine any scenario where an elim would vote like LL did, but I can imagine a situation where an eliminator would vote like Steel did, so that's where I will keep my vote until they respond. On the topic of Livinglegend, I should clarify that I do in fact find their actions suspicious and worthy of further inquiry, but I do not find it a move that an eliminator would likely make. It may sound paradoxical, but if they are an eliminator then how they voted last cycle makes zero sense whatsoever, which always causes alarms to go off in my head. @Herowannabe, I don't think that an eliminator would try to save a teammate when the closest competitor for the lynch is three votes behind, especially since they didn't even vote for that second-place competitor. The much more likely situation is that their claim to be neutral is valid and they have a very odd win condition. That being said, I am still very curious as to their response to your allegations since their actions confuse me to no end.

Seriously? Storms, this is fantastic! I don't remember a single time when there was an eliminator caught on the first day. Looking back at Drake's interactions D1, it seems that they posted very little of note. The things that pique my interest are those bandwagoning on him near the end, namely Steeldancer, Devotary, and Fifth. There is not much reason to speak of for voting, the most probably being "getting more info from killing them" that both Orlok and Devotary relied on, and that Steel also used to explain his vote based on Orlok's post. Something about @Steeldancer's post seems off to me though. Why would you change your vote from Lady of chaos to Drake and say that Orlok's reasoning was the reason when Orlok put his vote on Drake before you voted on Lady of chaos? Another curiosity is @livinglegend 's vote on Drought right after the cycle ended. It doesn't really seem like an eliminator move since it couldn't have changed the lynch target at that point, and all it did was draw attention to themselves. Especially since their prior post stated that they were most inclined to lynch either Lady of Chaos or Madagascar, then again going on to say that they'll leave things they way they were. Nothing about that makes any sort of sense to me. I think that I'll start of this cycle's voting with Steeldancer. Your vote at the end of last cycle makes me very suspicious. Considering the new information regarding the eliminators, I think the most likely scenario now is that there is only one eliminator team, like in a standard SE game. If Drake had been the only eliminator with a recruitment ability (which he didn't have), then we would have just won the game. However, seeing as how that is not the case, as well as the pluralized name "Escaped Inmates", I think it's safe to assume that they were a part of a team. Now, as it is, they were either a part of one of two or maybe three small teams, or else it's a standard game. With this amount of players, I believe it's unlikely that there is multiple eliminator teams.

Storms, I thought I was going to have more time to look at the novels of arguments and comments that Orlok and Eternum posted, but I'm swamped with family matters. Deepest apologies, but I'll be back after rollover.

English Language Arts. Sorry for not clarifying earlier. Not much time to post, I'll be back on before the end of the cycle since it was extended.

I'll just address this quickly. First off, it's good to see you again too Aman! It's good to be back in SE after a break (for the second time actually). I like words and how they work together. My ELA mark ended at a 95% and I like to think that my vocabulary is fairly sophisticated. Unfortunately, this post isn't helping me because you reminded me of my structured writing style and now I believe that I'm exaggerating it slightly. In addition, my posts tend to seem stiff and clinical due to my affinity for mathematics and a very linear way of thinking. My strengths include statistics and finding evidence based off of extended "what if" situations. Honestly, I'm practically useless when it comes to gut reads and behavioral speculation. And honestly, I treat these games like a debate. My goal is to try and convince the other players that my evidence is correct and that my assumptions are sound. I have found that the best way to do that is to formulate strong arguments that accurately articulate my points. I apologize if I go overboard sometimes, but every time I write a post, I feel like I am writing a miniature essay. On the topic of Eternum (since they are the ones currently up for lynch) I disagree that their "sense of cluelessness" indicates any link to eliminator behavior. I am frustrated too and I dislike not knowing how everything works. It's an understandable feeling. Aman, your next comment was on his stance concerning the discussion that was going on. You say that he seemed like he was trying to blend in, and this I believe is more credible. It's a very common tactic. On the other hand, it could just be that his feelings match those of the others in the thread. This is a game with a very small amount of information, and there are only so many stances to be had on a piece of info. Considering we have no definitive way of telling which statement is true, I don't think this is sufficient evidence. However, Devotary makes a point that I find compelling. I'm also curious to see why they think that the only thing we can do is lynch randomly. Voting patterns and player behavior are the principle methods with which to determine whom to vote for. Those have not been taken away from us, only knowledge of what can happen due to roles, as well as the details of the eliminator team. And just as a preventative argument that I know will come up for some reason, I'm not voting on them because I do not wish to participate in D1 lynches. You can look back into any game I've been in and see that this holds true. I believe that killing someone right out of the gate deprives them of some of the fun of playing SE. I've been killed day 1 and it wasn't fun. That being said, I will not try to convince anyone else to not vote since I recognize that D1 lynches are necessary for gathering information.

I tried to make an RP post, but I can't quite seem to get down what I mean into that format. Sorry Herowannabe, otherwise I would totally respond to your RP. On serious matters, Steel seems to me to be acting erratically, but not in any suspicious way. Orlok right now is giving me slight village vibes on account of his unique yet efficient way of generating discussion and gathering information. I'm inclined to agree with him in regards to STINK as well, his PM and general demeanor make me read him as village a little. Drought has seemingly disappeared, but we still have an entire day for him to show up again Storms, I hate having to analyze things based on player behavior. Blackout games take away my ability to determine statistics and role-based analysis. STINK does bring up a good point. I see basically two likely options for the starting eliminator team/teams. There is one elim who can recruit players as the game goes on. There is a standard eliminator team with no recruitment abilities. In option 1, there is also the possibility of a small team with limited recruitment abilities or the possibility of maybe two different teams with this ability. In any case in option 1, trust should be very limited since recruitment could turn someone who you trusted into an eliminator. I do not plan on claiming anything to anyone until we have a good grasp on the situation, and even then maybe I won't. I've never really been one to use PMs to their full potential, and even now I don't think I will use it as much as everyone else. The more public information we have, the better chance we have against the eliminators.

Okay, that's what I suspected. Unfortunately, I don't have much to go off of either. I think we will have to wait until at least the end of the first cycle to find out a little of what is going on with roles and such, but until then, I'd suggest following behavioral clues such as someone seeming overly cautious in their posts or lacking conviction with their accusations. As for claiming, not only does that give the elims more info with which to base their decisions off of, it will make them a target for almost everyone since there may be stealing roles or something else that would benefit from having a target with an item. Furthermore, I don't have an item and you're the only other person I have seen talking about them, and previous games are an unreliable source of info in SE, so I'm not even convinced there are any items in this game.

I vote bugle. But on a more serious topic, I'd really like to hear more about @Fifth Scholar's answer to my question. I'd also like to hear from a couple players who have responded to PMs but not the thread.

No, now he has a trumpet guy to do it for him.

STINK didn't have to have a trumpet guy back then, he just yelled random things at random people.

I think I remember STINK coming off as erratic and nonsensical in the past, so I won't put too much stock into what he says. And Drought seemed pretty sarcastic to me, so I don't read anything from that. @Fifth Scholar How serious were you about your statement? I can see that also being sarcastic, but It's a little harder to see that. If you were serious, then it would be telling and grounds for analysis.

Is there any type of advertising system in place to recommend SE to anyone not familiar with it? I stumbled across it on accident a few months after I joined, so people may not know about it. But then again, maybe this has already been tried and didn't work, declared a bad idea by those who know more about the forum, or something else. I don't know, just an idea.

I'll sign up as Lo-Kag, a horneater third son tailor whose family mysteriously disappeared one day back on the peaks.

Oh my gosh yay! I'm going to be in someone's signature! This is a happy moment.

Good game everybody! It was truly a pleasure fighting and dying with the eliminator team. I just want to say a couple things. @Orlok Tsubodai, thank you for your concern about the balance and the enjoyment of all players, including the eliminators, however I still hold firmly to the belief that since we signed up for the game, we should be willing to play it as it was designed. Plus, the balance wasn't really bad at all in my admittedly limited opinion. We were very confident in winning for a few cycles there, and it ended close anyways. I will going to admit, I am a lot more invested in a game when I'm an eliminator, but it turned my stomach to lie to all of you. It's part of the game, I know it, but I really felt like I was betraying you guys, something that hasn't happened in any of the other games I've played as an elim. It was a great game experience and I'd like to thank each and every one of you for making this one of my favorite games of SE that I've played. @Sart especially, thank you for GMing, this was wonderful. My fellow eliminators, I am sorry that I had to leave your ranks so soon. The mistakes I made were my own, leading to my untimely demise. Monster, I do not blame you for not saving me as you have stated in the doc that I read over that your reasons were IRL. Thank you for not just rolling over at the end and deciding to have fun while you still could, that's the kind of spirit I respect. Well done soldiers, your victory was hard-earned, revel in it.

Indeed, that would be splendid, thank you.

Indeed. Since I cannot play the game anymore, my enterprise must be abandoned.

My original plan was Dr. Pepper actually. Capsicum was what I found to be the scientific name for peppers.

K going to have to withdraw my name. Things are coming up too fast and I wouldn't be able to dedicate enough time to this.

Yeah, I'll give this a shot, but I'm probably going to die within three turns. That is my bold prediction and I'll be happy to be wrong. I'll join as Master Capsicum, an ambitious entrepreneur who wants to spread the joys of their latest non-alcoholic beverage, packaged in extremely small tin barrels that are painted maroon, to the world.

@Orlok Tsubodai c'mon man! What about all that logic and analysis cycle 1? Where is the orlok that I hope wouldn't vote on me without good reason that not only I need to survive, but the village would greatly benefit from since they wouldn't be voting a villager off the island? Where's that orlok?

@Jondesu personally, I'm not voting for Len based on playstyle, but rather the evidence that I laid out last cycle and that I linked in my post voting on Len. I can't speak for either of the others also voting for him, but I've suspected him since last cycle. As for his timeline arguments, I just made a mistake reading the thread. I've already explained that as best I can as well, but honestly, it was just me misreading it.

I don't have an idetic memory, I don't remember every reason for every post I've made, even in this game. Especially when it was a very short post correcting a minor error in judgement. I had just posted a long summary of my thoughts and then saw that you had made an assumption I thought to be incorrect. It took me four seconds to write that post you're going on about. When the initial voting on the abstainers came in, I didn't feel strongly that any of them were suspicious, so my decision was to wait and gather information on specifically those few players. Instead of throwing accusations around wildly with little to no conviction, I choose to be informed in my decisions, therefore allowing me to address the points I would most like to be explained by those I am accusing. If my vote on Alv took pressure off of anyone, it was purely coincidental. Alv seemed the most suspicious to me, Orlok seemed like a villager to me. Your point has merit to it, that is something that an elim would do. However, it is also something a villager would do because they have thoughts on a player. I was voting on the player I thought most likely to be an eliminator. I've already posted my thoughts on why I thought them suspicious when I actually voted on them, so I won't repeat that here. I sterted pushing for votes against you because you were my top suspect. Even at the time, I was aware that lynching in the abstainers was becoming a less and less likely way of finding an elim. So instead of spending time looking only at those in the abstainers, I broadened my analysis. This brought up many arguments for you being an elim as well. I've detailed those in the cycle prior, so I will link them here. Note that this is the same link you have linked above. These are arguments that are completely valid, even if they may or may not be true. Elenion, Your vehement assault on me based on my having suspicions is completely unfounded. I am not a liar, I am simply someone who made poor judgement calls when it came to whom they voted for. EDIT: ninja'd by Steel, gosh this is a ninja party.