Mark IV

Any reason why you think Sart is least the suspicious sitter? Is it just gut? Or something you don't want to disclose yet? Edit: Mostly OOG (out of game), but what's that hand symbol on Teldris' profile picture?

Am I missing something or are you calling RNG a smart tactic? I mean, I think you need to elaborate a bit cause it doesn't make sense to me rn

VOTE JO FOR AMYRLIN!!! JO'S THE BEST AMYRLIN CANDIDATE!!!! An Amyrlin that cares deeply enough to invent spreadsheets in WoT is definitely someone I want heading the Tower!!

Missed a spot there Edit: Nvm, me dumb All my pleasure

That's pretty tame for book Aes Sedai, though, no? I feel like they'd either bury Polly's existence under the rug or still and execute her for being Black Ajah Exile seems like a peaceful way to go for an outed BA

I'm gonna be voting for A Jo in the Bush too. The orderly thing to do would be to have everyone vote for their own Ajah sitters, I guess? Except TUN. Oh, nvm, that would involve mass claiming Ajah colours. Oops. That means I get to keep my Jo vote Surprisingly in character for Brown Ajah XD Also, wow, wasn't expecting we'd catch one on the first day. I guess I'd just be echoing other people at this point, but yeah, that lynch was kinda easy except for the Kas train and that's where I'll be looking for countertrain efforts too. Aeternum's vote count summary makes sense to me, but I'll look into it myself later today too. I'm up for making sure TUN is stilled today. Kinda lost - what does putting BB at two votes accomplish? On a side note, wasn't there someone else who we used to called BB? BalloonBoy or someone?

Aww Mom, do I have to? : / Jokes aside, I kinda forgot about the inactivity filter cause in my mind, I'm not inactive. Heh. I'm too tired to actually analyse and I'm not gonna be on again until after rollover, so I'm hesitant to tip the scales for the active tie. I remember I had an e!lean on TwinStorm so that's where I'm laying my vote for now - as an offical statement, I guess? I'll go through the thread again tomorrow and try and recall why I had the read I did. I think some part of it was me agreeing with Aeternum, but I wasn't convinced enough to actually vote. We'll see You gotta put your money where your mouth is, Terrisman Love the repitition Also, almost forgot to mention. Have a mild E read on gaea but I don't know/remember if it made sense. Too sleepy now and I don't wanna tip the scales on the active tie for nothing. That's all, folks. Have a nice rollover

You know what, I suddenly feel an urge to gamble The logical path would be to wait, but election bandwagoning seems so much more fun and I do feel like it'd be a disservice to not engage with the mechanics of the game. Jo, I'm not gonna do anything rn. But you can count on me if you need a little boost in your campaign. Literally every single person we killed said that. Apparently Alv was about to step out of the lurking shadows and expose all of us but we killed him. On a whim XD But yeah, I'm shocked you even recall that. To be honest though, I did genuinely have no idea what I was doing either Worked out in the end tho

This is just gonna be a reaction post to callouts in the thread, I guess I'll do a deeper read later Oh, huh, can't believe I missed that XD Count me less confused ------------- Reading the follow ups, I've realised I forgot to consider what happens when only two sitters remain - I had reasoned under the assumption that it was only the Hall of the Tower (the Sitters) who would be voting for Amyrlin and I forgot to reconsider once I learnt that it was all players. I can see how 2 sitters is more of a forced election now, yeah. Didn't realise the Green Ajah ability accelerates the end. Which makes me think - we could theoretically get off the hook with just one election by eliminating the last sitter using the Green Ajah ability. Then we'd have to decide whether to instate or depose the Amyrlin, which I guess we'll have to do anyway ------------- Maybe it's because most of my post is mechanics-based thinking rather than reading people etc? On a re-read, the post does feel kinda dry - kinda feels like it lacks engagement, so would be a good place for an elim to hide, but eh, It's been a long time since I played with Kas (I don't remember when I last played with him, really) but if my half-remembered impression is correct, Kas tends to be like this anyway. I don't think he used to stay very quiet (unless there was a knife in his back ). But it's been more than 8 years, and my memory isn't what it used to be (and maybe Kas isn't either ) I know you said you generally vote off of gut feel, so I don't necessarily expect you'll be able to answer, but I would really like to know what feels off to you in my posts. I've only made like 2 posts so far (with any substance, at least). So if there's something that's off, it's gotta be in there. On one hand, there's just one vote on me (yours), so I'm not too worried, I just want to know what caught your attention. But, on the other hand, I'm also only one vote away from being tied right now, so I'd like to know why in case I have to defend myself later in the day (rollover's at a really bad time, so I'd rather draft a response before that). Haha, dw. I think most of us have been there before ----------------- Any reason you've shifted from having a V lean on me last turn to being comfortable voting on me this turn? I see your white text and raise you white response text. Dw, not trusting Polly either ------------------ I had thought no one does it anymore, based on the last couple games I played :') ^This, ironically, makes me more suspicious of Kas. The first bit of evidence was him asking in thread if the N0 turn would have a elim kill. I'd have expected an elim to ask this in the elim doc instead. But with this line, I feel like it's just posturing to make it seem like he's less invested in the outcome, whereas an elim would be more invested in not dying. Maybe it's Kas playing mind games. Idk. Honestly, I think I'm overthinking it, so I'm discounting this line of reasoning for now ---------------- In terms of reads on current "votees": Polly - I'm gonna have to read her posts again. No reads right now, I've kinda forgotten what the conversation with her has been. Kas - Village lean based on meta-game sort of stuff. But also weary that this might be a trap? Drake - Had a slight elim read last cycle, but that might have just been me co-opting other people's reads Gaea - Their posts give me an elim read on them because I generally don't like the attack of "It's a gut feel and I can't put my finger on it" cause it's an easy elim cop out later in the game. But I want to hear from them before I vote for them (if I do) given they're already under pressure in the tie That's all the people in the tie with 2 votes. I was gonna vote for someone with a single vote, to broaden the tie and get in more reactions, but I don't have any solid leads/suspicions of my own and I don't want to parrot other people's suspicions. Maybe I'll come on in a bit and vote on someone with just 1 vote or maybe I'll come on in the end and vote for whoever I want. But at the moment, I'm not voting. You can do with the what you want. I need a break -------------- Yeah, the mechanics kinda make more sense now. Maybe I'd have been more excited to vote for an Amyrlin if she was gonna stick around and contribute to the win con Yeah, it feels like it's more of a two level game now (which is the intended meta, I guess?). Gotta narrow down on one confirmed village sitter and remove elims from the non-sitter pool.

@|TJ| (Tagging GMs for questions is still a thing, right? ) The Amrylin election and deposition is to be voted on by all the players alive in game, right? The rules do say "player" but I just want to double check. Because I was under the impression it was only the Hall of the Tower (i.e. the sitters) based on the books. My fault, I admit, but I just want to confirm. Wasn't me that brought up the idea of pair claiming. Was Ash, I think. Unless you're referring to the reasoning. Idk if I was the first with the core reasoning, but eh ------------------- Do you have any kind of negotiations in mind? I don't necessarily see Ajah membership being too decisive/relevant except in very specific/niche scenarios. ------------------ Take care fren. Migraines are oof. Okay, I'm still mildly confused - Is KelsierApologist Polly ? Re Terris: Are you saying you had Terris on a sus read but might revise that opinion based on a specific post from last turn Finally, could you (re?)elaborate on your village leans on Drake and Worldhopper? I didn't really see you interact much with Hopper last turn except for a few clarifications and you didn't really agree with Drake much about anything game-related. Is your opinion of Drake based on behaviour rather than specific content? ---------------- I don't entirely agree with this reasoning - the way it reads to me is that you're saying you don't have sitter reads right now and you're projecting that lack of information to a future (hypothetical) cycle where we have elected an Amyrlin and saying that someone pushing to depose an Amyrlin is clearly doing it for an ulterior motive (because of the projected lack of reads) and so is likely an elim? I know you and Kas already talked on this, and I can imagine this opinion might be based on a misunderstanding of the rules, so I'm not reading into it either way. But I do want to know what your opinion is now --------------- On the subject of Amyrlins - I think I'd say I agree with Sart here, and am basically echoing him but I also think we should ignore the Amyrlin election entirely. I feel like the sitter nomination/immunity and Amyrlin election mechanics mostly tip the balance more towards the elims. (Echoing Sart again) Electing an Amyrlin is a lylo (lynch or lose) sort of situation. In the event of an Amyrlin being elected, the village is forced to form a consensus on whether to depose the Amyrlin. Deposing a v!Amyrlin or retaining an e!Amyrlin is game over. And the payoff is really not worth it - we either just catch an elim or get an all doc seeing player, for docs that were 3 players each anyway, so not that private. Personally, I'm glad I can't become Amyrlin because I can't imagine reading and parsing 5 other Ajah docs. WITHIN ONE CYCLE !! Coming to the sitter mechanic - I disagree with Kas here (and agree with Steel) that the sitter mechanic basically acts as protection for BA members. Sitter elections were made N0, with limited analysis. That means we have little to no reason to assume any sitter is more likely to be village. Each BA sitter makes the BA more stronger than each village sitter makes the village stronger (I'm comparing the marginal utilities of a BA/non BA sitter for the BA/village respectively, if that makes sense). All the BA need to do is get 1 or even, burn the light, 2 sitters in and it'll be extremely difficult to get them out. The only good scenario for the village is all 6 sitters being village. Which feels somewhat unlikely to me. Or at least optimistic at best. Given both these points, the nominations just feel like additional mechanics we're gonna have to dismantle to be able to win as village. As someone else pointed out - the only way the village wins is by voting out the BA. The amyrlin is irrelevant and the sitters only dilute the power of the day vote. (And I don't think we're gonna use Amyrlin deposing as a lynch, at any rate ) Could we? O.o --------------- Emphasis mine I mean, the docs are the PMs in this game. And very likely compromised anyway. I understand where your gut feel is coming from, but I feel like you've got the situation turned around in this respect? I know Sart already responded to this, but I just wanted to point out (And Sart, correct me if I'm wrong) - I don't think Sart was advocating looking at non-sitters specifically. He was getting an inactive/quiet player to talk, regardless of sitter/non-sitter (I mean, I don't know why he chose Exp specifically, so this is just a guess based on my read of the in character call out) On that topic, I feel like it's equally important (or maybe more so) to focus on the players with actual immediate stakes in the game. A sitter is bound to be more relaxed about their status and so, an elim is unlikely to be pressured into action if an e!Sitter is under fire. Compare that to a non-sitter elim under fire and we're more likely to see elims overplay their hands to save teammates under threat. Add to that this is a day cycle and we finally need to vote for a non-sitter and I can make Sart's post make sense to me -------------- Joe asked me whether I'm still inclined toward pair claiming - on a rethink, and after realising that all Ajah abilities are either passive or once per game active abilities (and given my new opinions on the sitter/election mechanics), I'm not too sure taking over an Ajah is really a priority for the elims, (last minute thought: except to prevent stilling). Personally, I'm leaning somewhat toward v!Sart. I agree strongly with the post about being against electing an Amyrlin and I feel like elims would push for the elections to be a more central/active mechanic in this game, given its ties with their win cons. Again, I had a village gut read on Steel, but I don't remember why anymore so Steel, you're in the same camp as Jo now. Sorry On a reread, I notice that most Ajah abilities are to do with preventing or hastening stilling (White and Grey being the exceptions; Green being the only hastening ability). I'd be up for using the Green Ajah ability to still one sitter early game. Maybe N1 or N2. I'm essentially leaning toward dismantling both the sitter and Amyrlin mechanics, I guess, and approaching the game as a less role focused game. The important part with the factions - the Sitter nominations - is already done anyway. Also, I'm now realising that I myself don't have reads on non-sitters yet. Oops Guess I'll do that tomorrow now. It is late now, I should sleep. Some parts of my post are a little rambling, so if something seems circular, contradictory or unclear, feel free to ask Guess I'll actually look into forming some actionable reads once I go over the thread after waking up tomorrow Edit: Also, why are some people saying we'd have to engineer ties for the Amyrlin vote? We just have to make sure we don't hit majority. @|TJ| Will the Amyrlin election happen through public voting? Or will the votes be private? Edit 2: What do other people think about dismantling the Amyrlin/Sitter mechanics? I'm not too sure TJ would be too happy about it (If we could even pull it off )

Why does this describe Aman so well XD -------- Welp, finally caught up. Spent way too long on this. My two cents on the Ajah claiming thing, though I guess it might be a little late for alignment phishing - I was initially against Ajah claiming because it seemed too close to role claiming in other games and that felt like too much public information. But Kas' points about Ajah over targeting make sense to me. I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of having that much info public, but I'm more uncomfortable with the Black Ajah wiping out other members in their Ajah and then spinning their own stories/having complete control over certain Ajahs. Kas mentions that he's not too concerned with Ajah powers being used correctly, and while I agree with that, I'm more concerned about Ajah powers being misused by the BA. (Maybe the one use Ajahs should just finish off with their power usage /jk) Thinking of elim distributions (I know someone's gone over this, but still): assuming 4 elims - They could be spaced out evenly, so 1 elim per Ajah. Which means the elim know 4/6 ajah member make ups. Which means they only need to figure out 2 ajahs/6 players ajahs. Add to that the fact that Sitters will have their colours revealed, and you're left with only 4 players with unknown ajahs. Maybe they're placed as 2,1,1. Which still gives them ajah membership for 3 ajahs and 3 other sitters. That's only 6/18 players' missing information after D1 sitter flips. That's still a lot of information. Finally, if it's something like 2,2 - then ajah power manip might be a real problem if the two affected Ajah's have useful powers (for the elims). That's an if, but still a scenario I don't like. I'm forgetting a couple points, I think, but eh. Personally, I think a delayed Ajah claim might be a good option. Kas (again!) already mentioned this, so I won't go over it again, but Ajah overtargetting does seem like a real issue to me and catching elims red handed seems more useful to me than preventing overtargetting completely. Maybe I'm not thinking this through, but that's what it looks like to me rn. I doubt we'd be able to pull it off though. So this is all theoretical anyway. Ajah non-sitter pair reveals make sense to me, really. The sitter can't be pressured easily due to immunity, so if both non sitters die in an Ajah with an E!Sitter, then we'd be none the wiser, and we'd have a loose E!Sitter with free access to the ajah power. At least pair claiming ensures we know when both non sitters are dead in an Ajah. (On a side note, I'm kinda imagining non-sitters as watchdogs for sitters in their ajah, hence my reasoning above) ------------- That aside, I currently have a slight V!Kas read right now. Not knowing about the N0 kill and asking about it in thread seems village-y (but could also be a very conceited elim move, who knows ) I initially had a V!lean on Joe, but now I'm not sure why, so back to neutral. Joe, Steel, TUN, Gaea and Drake (might've missed someone?) argued against ajah claiming, though Drake admitted he wasn't too vested in the concept either way. Idk why, but this gives me a gut E!read on Drake. ------------- Phew, beat roll over

Checking in - still catching up on the thread, only halfway through. I will post my full thoughts once I'm done, but I'm not completely for an Ajah claim right now (I assume that discussion hasn't been settled yet past what I've read ).

Eh, as an elim, honestly a visible D1 vote and possibly directing D1 discussion is definitely something worth risking higher visibility for. Especially if it's D1, where elim!Joe could easily just pretend they had no idea Exp was innocent - we're all shooting in the dark anyway. I agree it would be alignment indicative in certain circumstances (especially mid and late game), but personally, I would mostly discount this specific instant. But, of course, that's just my judgement/opinion . I understand where you're coming from too. ------------ A couple of GM questions, @The Unknown Flame: What happens in case of a tie? I skimmed the rules but couldn't see any mention of it. (Possible I missed it) How does one retract a vote and vote for no one? I don't see a null option in the spreadsheet Also, why is everyone using red for every suspicion? It kinda makes it confusing who you're actually voting for

Lamron's head was spinning trying to figure out who wanted to kill whom. He thought he finally had the hang of it though. Most people wanted either one of the Suspicious card Man, the exploding sphere fellow or the crazy foolish guy dead. Lamron didn't really know why anyone suspected that last one. They hadn't even said anything meaningful yet. Maybe that's why? "Hey you! Why are your eyes still wide? You wanna say something? He shouted, perhaps unwisely, at the twice fooled once crazy man. ------------------------------------------- Currently It's @Experience, @TheRavenHasLanded and @A Joe in the Bush who are in a 3 way tie for the vote at 2 counts each. I'm not entirely sure why Raven has 2 votes. But at least it'll be fun to see what happens next. I'm not personally too worried about the post limit if I'm being honest. I don't think I make that many posts in a QF cycle on a good day.

Lamron found The Suspicious Man was indeed suspicious - interesting how that figured. Maybe he should have come up with a better name. Lamron decided he might have to speak up, given that leaving the bendalloy bubble seemed less and less of an option. "It was all yer cards that started all this. And now we got a bomb hanging over our heads. Might as well do the traitor's job for them, eh?", he said as he pointed a stubby finger towards The Suspicious Man. "Also, why in the world is The a part of your name? " Lamron didn't agree with this sentiment entirely. Sure, it was kind of odd that Exp reserved the bomb for use on their own gang mates - but out here it was almost always each for their own. He knew if he'd been threatened based on someone else's (manipulated!!!) deck of cards, then he'd probably loose it too. Maybe Exp was bluffing and the bomb did nothing, or maybe they were saving it for a special occasion, but he expected a bomb would have already done its damage in the hands of a traitor. ------------------------- It would be fairly suspicious to cast a vote in the sheet and not announce anything about it in the thread - anyone caught doing this would definitely get flak for it, probably being killed for being a turncoat as well (barring post limit shenanigans, of course). I don't think it's really alignment indicative that Suspicious explicitly voted. I expect he'd do the same regardless of whether he were gang or turncoat. In fact, he's being suspicious by not being suspicious by explicitly voting!! Which means he's being suspicious, so ... he's not suspicious... ? Uhhh, In don't think I want Lamron confused like that. Yeah, I agree people can change their vote secretly and that's gonna be a slight hassle. I'd probably prefer if people tried to post their votes as much as possible. A gang member's strongest weapon is the information you generate, of course. I get that there'll have to be a compromise with the post limit, but still. ----------------------------- Personally, I was leaning toward an Exp vote for RP reasons, but The Suspicious Man's getting mildly suspicious in my eyes, so