Elenion
-
Posts
2660 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Elenion
-
BR Kynedath Kynedath is lying to us about their reasoning, as I just pointed out above. I also just thought of a way to verify that Eternum actually did scan Orlok: Crabs tell you the action's target. I just PMed Orlok to ask Eternum who Orlok's target was. If Eternum can't answer, they're lying too.
-
That's a lie. The post is here, on page 8. Alv's death and alignment weren't reported until page 9, so your reasoning that you give for this post must be fictitious. Edit: to clarify on this, page 8 is the second cycle, not the third. Alv hadn't passed it off because he'd only picked it up at the end of C1, and so this post was definitely not about who Alv had passed it to like Kynedath says it is.
-
Analysis post incoming, earlier than I expected: There are a few things that I'm going to be looking for as I reread the thread. The first of which is players that had the opportunity and reasoning to vote on BR but held back. Expressing suspicion of BR is good, but there were a few players that I remember seeming very hesitant to vote on her. The second of which is players that seemed to know too much about the game state cycle 1 or 2. Thirdly, any analysis that seems intended to throw us off. 1. First post that catches my eye is Kynedath's no D1 lynch post. Especially for a game that could be short, we need discussion, fast. But it appears Kynedath has taken this stance before and so I'm going to call it NAI. 2. A few players are poke-voting C1 and others are holding back. I don't see anything not in character. 3. BR posts suggesting we announce what supplies we're going for. I've already made a large post about why this is detrimental to all but the elims. She support's Orlok's idea of flipping a coin for the gun. 4. Livinglegend says he'll go for the gun and then doesn't. That would give me a bad read on him, if he wasn't already dead and village. 5. Eternum says C1 that he'll suspect anyone that goes for the acid, because the acid would be helpful for elims. While I don't agree with his position, this gives me a village read on him for attempting to choke the elims of supplies. 6. C1 is now over and items have been distributed. Just like the Thief didn't go for a Bribe C1, I don't think the elims would have gone for Acid, either, so slight village read on Jon. I'm thinking elims would have gone for crabs and chalk, to scan the village and protect against gun attacks. One thing that strikes me as off, though, @Devotary of Spontaneity why did you go for chalk C1? Kynedath was very vocal and I'm just paranoid, but I woudn't have expected the elims to target you. 7. The Alv lynch: Now to the fun part: when the votes start coming in on the six. First is village!Drake with a vote on Alv. Kynedath posts analysis but chooses not to vote. Next vote is mine, on Orlok. I was partially right in that he was not village, but he wasn't elim. Next is Jon, voting on Eternum. His reasoning is good, so I don't think this was an attempt to keep suspicion off BR. Note that at this point, there is one vote on 3 different players. Village!Alv then votes on Monster to shake things up. Monster then votes BR instead of Budgie, so village read on him for that. Kynedath reappears, tipping the vote to Alv and rebutting my points against Orlok. I'm getting bad vibes from this post, because Orlok turned out to be the thief and Alv was a villager, and this is the vote that changed the random voting into the Alv bandwagon. Steel then votes on Orlok with me, tying Alv and Orlok at 2. Jon the posts, voting on Alv again and breaking the tie. This isn't as suspicious as Kynedath's because we know Orlok couldn't have asked for assistance in a doc, while BR could, but I still get a slight negative vibe from it. I then remove my vote from Orlok because I don't want to lynch him while he's in the hospital. The other viable lynch at that point is Alv, so I join that bandwagon. Eternum posts but decides to hold his vote back. He says nothing about BR except that he's got no read on her. Eternum then votes on Monster for a misunderstanding, which I'm not sure what to think about. Probably slight elim read. Alv votes Orlok, Orlok votes Alv. Manukos appears and makes a NAI post. 8. Right after the Orlok reveal, Kynedath asks me why the village couldn't have the map. This makes me wonder if Kynedath had inside info that the elims didn't have the map, because I can't see any other way to reach that conclusion. That's all for now; I'll be back later. But right now I think my analysis is implicating Kynedath.
-
You too? Dang. So many acid-heads in the game. Alv gave someone the map because he had it, but it didn't return to the stash after he died, so he must have passed it along. I wouldn't suggest lynching Monster over keeping the map's holder's identity secret. I do that kind of thing all the time, village or elim. (I'm in class)
-
I don't know who has the map. Last cycle I suspected it was Budgie, but since he didn't drop the map when he died that means it wasn't him. However, I do have a contact (other than Eternum) who confirmed to me that Orlok is the thief, so we can remove our tinfoil hats. I'm glad that Orlok is shooting BR; that way we don't have to burn this cycle with nothing more than a bandwagon. However, are we sure that BR will die? If the elims obtained Chalk from the supply they can keep her alive for a cycle at the cost of suspicion on those who took chalk. For the record, I've already used mine. I'll have some time for analysis this afternoon after physics class but before a date, so expect it with about a day left in the cycle. @MonsterMetroid I'm sure that Orlok is clean and fairly confident that Eternum is as well, so with BR hopefully dying tonight then I agree that it's better to start looking outside of the abstainers (yes, Kynedath, I'm adopting your terminology). Also, to the person who used Acid on me last cycle, it was most inconvenient.
-
Cycle 1 there were 6 people who could have put the kill in: Orlok, Alv, Budgie, BR, Eternum, and Monster. Alv and Budgie are dead. Eternum's alibi is watertight. Orlok is basically confirmed thief. That makes it either Monster or BR, and Monster wouldn't have purposefully implicated himself when he put up that analysis. That only leaves BR. Let's finish this.
-
Budgie (4): Len, Orlok, Caesura, BR Len (2): Monster, Kynedath Devotary (1): Steel If Budgie is evil, I'm not suspicious of BR anymore. If Budgie is evil, BR is really the only option left for who put in the elim kill.
-
@Caesura I just moved my vote to Budgie, so a vote on BR won't help us much because she's not a viable lynch anymore. Would you consider moving it to Budgie? We'll still get info about BR.
-
I've been talking in PMs with Orlok and he's convinced me that a Budgie lynch would be more beneficial to us than a BR lynch. I know it's a bit late in the cycle for this sort of thing, but it's taken Orlok this long to convince me. This way we still get info about BR, and we still have a chance of hitting an elim as opposed to lynching me.
-
I don't think I've got much more to say than what I've said already. Please, if you haven't already, cast your votes. I hope I can convince you that BR is an elim, but if I can't I'll be leaving parting reads and suggestions before I go.
-
@Kynedath I'm a shift leader at a fast food diner and also a half-time college student, and so my schedule is very strange. I will confess to, in addition to that, not being on as much as usual C1, but if you look at past games I usually don't even get my analysis really going until cycle 3-4, so I'm actually starting early this game. I don't usually do well with tone reads; I prefer process of elimination and analysis of elim strategy. Since most of D1 is just tone stuff, I usually keep my head down. I called analysis on Budgie and Eternum a dead end because at the time I believed each had sent in no action, something impossible to verify. After Eternum claimed an action and Budgie provided a good alibi, both of those changed. I stopped pushing my points D2 because I wasn't the person with good analysis against Alv. Had we been debating Orlok I would have kept going, but after that lynch stopped I hopped onto the Alv lynch because I wanted to ensure a lynch on someone in the 6 that I wasn't reading good on. BR would have worked equally well. I kept vote tallies up to ensure Alv was lynched, but I wasn't going to provide evidence and reads I didn't have. I initially took Orlok's claim to be the truth because he's Orlok. He's not the type to false claim that early. After he covered for Eternum I got a paranoid feeling that he could be a deep-cover elim, but after nobody counterclaimed that suspicion passed, hence why I now trust Eternum. I really don't think Jon is a valid suspect, so I wanted to kill the bandwagon on him because it had no good reason to exist in the first place. All Jon did was take an item in full public view, and he didn't try to be sneaky at all about it. That's NAI to me, so I intervened to ensure the lynch fell where there was a good chance of an elim being. @BrightnessRadiant One of them has to be an elim, because the elim kill was put in using an action. The second was because somebody took the map, but now we know that was village!Alv doing something that I thought no villager would do.
-
The Wheel turns and history repeats. The end result of your analysis agrees with my logic yesterday that if there are 2 elims in the 6, then it's best to look there. I think my assumption of 2 elims was justified at the time: the only reason that it did not work is that Alv was acting against his own win condition, and in my logic I assumed all players were playing to win. So really, your vote on me boils down to me being wrong about how many elims were in the group, and I can't think of a single player here who suspected that a villager took the map without the intention to use it. That was referring to this post, right? This idea actually has the potential to hurt us instead of help us. Let's say a village vanilla Jimmy gets a piece of Chalk one night. The next day, he gets the feeling that he might be an elim target. If we instituted BR's suggestion, Jimmy would have to post in thread whether or not he's going for an item. Jimmy has 4 options: 1. Announce he's going for an item and then go for one. This tells the elims he's wide open for a kill, so Jimmy has a good chance of dying to the elims. 2. Announce he's going for an item and then use the Chalk. He might block the elim kill, but he's summarily lynched for lying about his action amid allegations of a WGG. 3. Announce he's not going for an item, and then go for one. Once again, Jimmy ends up on the gallows for lying. 4. Announce he's not going for an item, and then use the Chalk. Using the Chalk would be worthless for him, because the elims know not to target him. The only way to avoid this problem is not lynching liars, but then how would we know who's an elim and who's a villager trying to throw the elims off? BR's suggestion doesn't help us in the short run or in the long run; it just leads to the elims having a decreased chance of hitting Chalk. Also, @Orlok Tsubodai, you just said, but up above you said, If you agree with my vote on BR over Monster, for the same reason as his posts sounding village, why do you challenge me on that? And to your question about why I discount Budgie from analysis, it's because misremembering the game format isn't the usual excuse. If I was to have made up an excuse for forgetting my action in my first few games, I would have gone for something like forgetting how to submit actions or forgetting an action altogether, not forgetting the game format. I think his alibi's genuine because it's an explanation that you likely wouldn't think of had it not actually happened to you.
-
About the 4 elims: what I did was use the square root rule to get 4, then look at the game state with 3, 4, and 5 elims. With 3 elims we'd only be 18% elim, which is possible but a bit on the low end, especially because we have more than 16 players. 5 is out of the question, because that's almost 30% elim, far too high. 4 elims would be 24% elim, right in the 20-25% sweet spot that I like for balance. I've gotta go so I'll make this quick and expound later. I disagree that BR's suggestion is as scary for the elims as Monster's. Reasons forthcoming. Of course I was confident in the Alv lynch. It hadn't entered my mind that Alv would have played against his own faction, and so I calculated at the time that we had 2 elims in a field of 5. Even lynching blindly that's nearly a 50% chance of success, and Alv I had a negative read on even out of that group.
-
Mr. Klenien poked his head out of his tent. The morning had passed uneventfully after the clown debacle, and so he had decided to take a nap. He didn't get many of those: fighting at the Tower did not leave a person time for such things, and before that his fiance had wanted him to spend every free moment with her. That had been enjoyable, of course, but it didn't lend itself well to a healthy sleep schedule. Stooping down to tighten down the laces on his glossy boots--his fiance had insisted on shining them before he had left, for luck--he groaned slightly. He hadn't seen any rocks on the ground when he had pitched the tent, but his back begged to differ. The mess tent was a hubbub of voices. Usually it was quiet; the soldiers usually were more concerned about chowing down than socializing, but today you could tell that the camp was on edge. Mr. Klenien got his food and purposefully sat down alone. He had two reasons for that. The first was personal: he thought better when he was alone. The second was practical: it was hard to stab someone you weren't next to. Finally, he got to his feet and the tent quieted somewhat. "Ladies, gents. I have a grave accusation to make. I've been doing some accounting of what we were doing during the Joe murder yesterday, and I can say with some certainty that Mya (BR) was the person who killed Joe. I don't make this accusation lightly, but something must be done. "I'm sure you're all familiar with the fact that all but six of us saw each other in the supply tent. Of those that were gone, we can account for their actions. The clown Ronald was not a traitor, so he could not have done it. The kleptomaniac Orlok could not have, either, because it's not in his nature to kill. We can also account for Aiden (Eternum), because he saw said kleptomaniac stealing and accosted him about it. Rose-Mary Soup (Budgie) claims to not have been in the camp that morning because they got lost, and I believe them. Nb'nub (Monster) was not with us, but it was he who suggested that we look into alibis, and he does not strike me as the suicidal type. That leaves only Mya (BR).
-
Wait... what? We literally have a field of 5 players where we know 2 of them are elims, but yet we have a bandwagon forming on Jon? I've gotta run to work in like 3 minutes, and I won't be on for turnover, but I'm going to pitch a defense for Jon. 1. If you're an elim, and you know that item choices are going to be looked at, would you go for the item that has a possible elim use? 2. If Jon targets the player making the elim kill with the acid, no elim kill and that player is toast because Jon can just tell us who they are and we lynch them. I'd say that's pretty beneficial for us. OK, things just got a little better with Devotary's post, but I'm still concerned.
-
I did some analysis in my notes earlier this cycle, and the only thing I saw taken that was slightly suspicious was Jon and his acid, but acid is useful for blocking the elim kill. Well, the acid and the map, I guess.
-
A village sneak would have had no reason to take the map. Because a sneak took it and hasn't said anything, we know that they're elim and will not want to use the map.
-
Assuming that Orlok doesn't counter Eternum's claim of scanning, I'm inclined to trust Eternum. For a minute I was suspicious that we could have an elim!Orlok covering for an elim!Eternum, but Eternum PMing Orlok instead of putting him on the elim kill list sounds like a village thing to do. Plus Orlok would make a reasonable D1 scan. But wait... Orlok said he would consider helping the elims. Is he just giving Eternum an alibi to get him out of the suspects shortlist? Dangit now in doubting myself. @Alvron @MonsterMetroid It's not possible for the map thief to not have been caught in the net. There's a chance they're not elim, yes, but whatever the case if we keep lynching then we get the map back into circulation. I also think Alv might be trying to subtly discourage lynching in that group for elims.
-
I've been wondering if Orlok was the thief since a player asked me in PM if I had a way to find the thief, but it looks like I won't have to worry about that anymore. I suggest we let Orlok live. One, because we didn't really earn the right to lynch him: he revealed himself without any analysis calling him out as the thief in specific. Two, I'm really liking his gun plan, because I don't want to lose a herd to the gun nor give it up completely for the elims to take. I'm not sure if the game will be completely broken, because we have no leads on two of the elims (assuming 4 exist), but right now it does feel a little like shooting fish in a barrel. I'll have to think about letting Orlok overtly aid the elims.
-
Eternum's vote against Monster was originally a retaliation sort of vote, so him pulling it doesn't tip off my elim radar. I'm reading slightly village on him because he doesn't seem to appear to be afraid of garnering suspicion, but it's still a slight read and he's still in 4th out of the 6 in terms of most likely to be an elim. I'm going to be in a lecture and then in an exam, so I won't be on for a bit.
-
Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2 Eternum (1): Jon1, Monster2 Orlok (2): Len1, Steel1, Caesura1 Monster (2): Alv1, Eternum1 BR (0): Monster1 I'm still liking this game state overall, but I'm beginning to grow concerned about the votes on Monster. Both of them are coming from inside the 6, where we know that 2 elims and maybe the thief are lurking, so I think it may be an elim counter-bandwagon. I think it's elim rather than simply self-preservation voting because the target is Monster of all players, who I see as the most trusted of the 6. @Alvron Since there's no longer any chance of a tie, what are your reasons for keeping your vote on Monster? Self-preservation? If so, why are you on him and not Orlok, who has a higher chance of being lynched?
-
Vote tally: Alv (4): Drake1, Kynedath1, Jon2, Len2 Eternum (0): Jon1 Orlok (1): Len1, Steel1 Monster (1): Alv1 BR (1): Monster1 I'm liking this game state much better than the many-way tie. Assuming no more vote changes (unlikely I know), the Alv lynch should be immune to vote manipulation.
-
Orlok just got hospitalized, and while I still suspect him I don't want to hit a guy while he's down like that. Orlok I'm moving my vote to Alv. Reasoning: 1. Third on my list of suspicions in the 6 2. Already has votes on him, so voting on him prevents the RNG from coming into play 3. I want his alignment so I can better analyze Orlok 4. He still hasn't claimed an action for last night
-
@Drake Marshall @Jondesu You've both been on and analyzing. Save us from this madness!
-
I think our chances are much better than 4 in 6. Even if we assume that my analysis didn't net the thief in the 6, we can still do analysis on the 6 players to determine who is more likely to be an elim. Orlok, I believe, has a far higher chance of being evil than Budgie, who wasn't even on for turnover. Brightness has a higher chance of being evil than Monster. My list of elims out of the 6, by likelihood: 1. Orlok (moderate distrust). I've already made a large post about why he should be at the top of the list, so I won't repeat that. 2. Brightness (minor distrust). Admits to being on at turnover and having an opportunity to put in the kill. I've played enough Secret Hitler and Wolfia with her to know that she can play it cool when she's evil. 3. Alv (very minor distrust). I don't like his tie-the-lynch strategy. Very minor negative read on him for that. 4. Eternum (neutral). Not too much info to analyze. Jon called him for withholding information, but I'm not sure how accurate that is. Subject to change based on Eternum's next post. 5. Budgie (slight trust). I think his claim of missing turnover is legit. 5. Monster (moderate-strong trust). He came up with the idea of narrowing the field independently from me, and so it's partially due to him that we're at this good spot right now. Add in taking his village-ness for granted and there's a good case for him being village.
