Mint Heron

F this. I'm gonna watch my GOAT wrestle tonight. Wtf is this game. Wyf js Engkish. Wtf is anything.

WHAT TF OK LISTEN HERE MEERKAT WHO TF DID YOU SCAN WTF

Because it auto-merges and I don't expect 42069 posts to appear while I'm typing

I don't know if I do tbh. But I think it's something I wanted to table regardless. I think pragmatic exes suck tbh and the exe I felt worst about was the Village agreeing to exe someone we all thought likely Village just because we didn't trust him with his role. Lmao. @Ivory Dragonfly - I'm aware but I think we were theorising E!CS worlds imply smaller E!team. I don't think it works and actions economy shows why.

You wanna use all your protect resources this way? Because they can't double target. If Rhino or someone Smokes Octo regardless of alignment, we are forced to resolve Octo tomorrow regardless because once Zebra is down, you only have a 2/1 Lurcher shift split. Not saying we should. I'm just talking strategy atm and thinking aloud.

Edited Y: Yeah. It's pragmatic but I want input because it's also cold and kinda ruthless. If at least 3 of the Lurchers really are V, taking Ocho out guarantees a soft monopoly on protects. This fails if Flam is an E!Seeker protecting Toucan or if there's a third goddamn CS but otherwise... (Someone correct me if I missed something.) I will say I can 100% believe Zebra WBGed or just claimed the protect btw.

EDIT X: I'm pointing out Flam probably actually is a Seeker. We're kinda assuming V. Like look man this is functionally a puzzle meaning we gotta agree on what the set-up and assumptions are. It's risky for Flam to claim if they weren't actually one. We only get one action. We were speculating E!CS might mean smaller team. If only four Elims and E!CS, Ocho is last Elim standing. They can only use Spiked kill or CS kill. But we saw both.

EDIT F KNOWS HOW MANY: READ U FOOL HE CLAIMED THE PROTECT ON ME An E!CS double kill punches through a Lurch. If we're worried about it, I think there's a pragmatic argument for flipping Ocho and it's the main reason I considered it.

EDIT 2: Yeah, I've considered it. Ultimately I struggle to make sense of the 4L + 2CS picture. I can't see the Elim team atm being balanced with it. Risky for Flam to claim without being cced so I believe Flam has the template. It is technically possible Flam is a second E!kandra into E!seeker who hellbussed Ig for v!cred. But IDK the odds. I'd note Ocho claimed the shot last night. If @Sunburst Toucan does as well, ... no. Technically multiple attacks are declared by the GM but: @A Jo in the Bush / @The Unknown Medallion confirm pls? My other thought is that Ocho cannot be a lone Elim because Ocho would have just claimed a no kill I think? Because actions economy. It's possible Ocho saw the attack and decided to just claim it ig?

Edit: If Lion claims CS or Lurcher I'm just done here.

THIS IS YOUR LAST STRAW UCE????? NOT THE 42069 NONSENSE CLAIMS WE HAVE UNTIL THIS POINT, THIS?????????

YES AND APPARENTLY FLAM SCANNED TOUCAN AS V!CS SOMETHING IS V WRONG DIGGA SOMETHING IS V V WRONG Edit: For the record I would like to claim that I am NOT A LURCHER!!!

I considered it but I just wanted to make sure it was not Flam being weird about Toucan Ocho???? Two V!CS????? Like. Can that distro work? I know it's a Jo and TUM- AAAAAAAAAAA OH MY GOD WHY FML I DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH CAFFEINE FOR THIS OR SAN OMGWTFBBQ Edit: @Violet Axolotl ...Weasel claimed Lurcher too bruv. Four Lurcher claims, Flam claimed kandra turned Seeker who scanned Toucan as a V!CS. Welcome to hell.

HOW DO YOU THINK IT FEELS BEAGLE Edit: Yeah I realised sorry, even cut off my post because of it. I think my one question is: if Toucan actually shot Croc, why did Toucan not shoot Ocho last Night? Because we didn't see an attack write-up at all and Toucan would then know Ocho was lying. I think there's a pragmatic case for voting Ocho at this point if we still agree you're V because protected targets can still die to overspill (NK + shot)

Sorry it's been busy. I'm just gonna triage the most important things: @Onyx Flamingo I repeat: I get it but you are only telling me that you are personally very sure of Toucan given your read of their identity. I don't know who you are, I don't know who Toucan is, you being very sure tells me nothing because people can be mistaken in their reads. I think you're Village and don't need to know who you both are but we are not at a stage of the game I can accept a raw, "trust me bro" vouch anymore. I need you to explain why you think Toucan is V, pointing to the factors that create this certainty in you. @Plum Rhinoceros: I think it's moved past us at this point but fundamentally I think you are excluding certain votes (e.g. Ig D1) as being indicative of alignment while credencing on other votes (e.g Ig D2.) I am concerned about FUD in that I think you are moving to keep Axl in the suspect pool rather than shrinking PoE and doing it by saying "Ah but have you considered a world for which we have no evidence and no likelihood assessment for but it's possible and because it's possible, a v!read cannot be ascribed." I distrust this because I think Elim strategy at the clean-up stage is to keep PoE as wide open as possible. @Whoever: The only thing I can add to the current Lurcher debate is that I agree that 4 Lurchers and potentially up to four V!MB is an intrinsically weird distro. I'm not confident in saying where the issue is but I struggle in seeing 4 V!L being considered ok on the OG ruleset even with E!CS. I'm wary of a WBG on Zebra's part tbh. Ocho PMed me last night saying to exe Axl if they died. I don't know if this means Ocho and Axl had initially arranged for Axl to Lurch Ocho since I did not reach out to Axl at all. There's a world Axl said they'd protect Ocho and Ocho decides U can thus be killed ig. I can't contribute to @Taupe Gecko or @Violet Axolotl or @Quartz Zebra here because I probably should be dead and don't know what went down. I just... don't super feel like Ocho's play is very E!CS? IDK man I just feel like they've not been very keen to try to pocket the Lurchers or reach out to them. I feel like my PM asking Ocho to consided PMing DF or Axl just had Ocho shrugging and going "well I hope they protect me" without having ever said they reached out to DF/Axl. You could say they distrusted me but I think it's harder for Elims to remember to fake that kind of paranoia when they're trying to pocket. At the same time I struggle to understand a CS so scared of being exed (proving themselves etc) go "yo if the Elims kill me they kill me ig." I also think Rhino raises a fair question wrt how the Lurchers all reacted to Dingo/ - you know what wtaf wtf did I just see. Guys what. Wtf. EDIT: I AM COMING BACK WHEN YOU MFERS STOP CLAIMING WTF I MEAN OK I GEDDIT TY FLAM THIS MAKES SENSE BUT ALSO WTF GUYS I CANNOT EVEN

Wtaf did i return to.

I'd genuinely like an answer by end of C3 because I think it affects how we should be playing the game, depending on whether the refusal to do anything about those two players suggests they are actually not inactives and are (somehow) lurking and sending in orders without filter pressure or not. Lion last logged in on 4th Jan so I'm guessing that Lion is a genuine inactive but Pearl Chameleon has a 7th Jan 1159hrs login which makes me feel that there might be something going on there. I'm not interested in diverting to these guys; I think if anything we can talk about resolving by Coinshot at some point. Like, if the last Elim standing* ends up being Lion, and we kill half the game trying to find them because they're doing nothing, then what? *Note that we are not entertaining either Lion or Cham at this point because there was a kill, which requires someone to have sent in an order. I think my concern is primarily that it looks like an argumentative strategy to create complex explanations for things (notably for which we have no evidence beyond the fact it might have happened) in order to disregard direct evidence. In which case my question is: why even bother doing vote analysis (like you were trying to do earlier this cycle?) And when do you decide something needs a 'just so' explanation for which we have zero evidence beyond plausibility and when not? I don't really care about method arguments if we're finding Elims and I think they're boring in big 2026. My concern and the reason I've latched on to this is it reads like you're trying to FUD-lite in a game for a particular push, and the FUDing is the red flag to me. I want answers to these two posts before making up my mind, btw. I think both these posts look incredibly problematic given both players' stances D2 and early game credit on Zebra can only last so long. I can see a world we are overly-crutching on Elim opportunism on Ocho btw. It is just as possible they decided to let the Village kill itself without interference. To open things up more: Zebra My main issue is that it was one directional. But I also think that I cannot say I believe in Zebra's later game enough that the early game credit should be sacred. I will note going forward that in most worlds we are in a two Elims world left, one Elim in some distros but I don't really believe one. Unless we're in a three Elims world, we're not going to see train size be as indicative anymore, depending. They just don't have the numbers left to split votes too hard. I agree I prefer a non-unanimous votestate, but this is functionally the cleaning up stage of a game if we don't misplay. People need to not overcrutch on expecting a split vote at this point. Edited to add: @Onyx Flamingo Could you say a bit more about your Toucan read? I'm not comfortable basing my entire read of Toucan off your vouch which is in itself based on Toucan's identity at this stage in the game.

Like ok literally dude: how often does an AG8 situation happen? You wanna invoke that, ok. How many games does AG8ing make you wrong in? Once we start saying "sometimes there just is no explanation", legit, where does it end? Edited to add: How does it lead to a useful approach for us, gameplay-wise?

Gotta be honest bruv, I think if your immediate answer to a challenge to your theory is "sometimes there is no explanation", you're basically saying "it just is what it is, Iguana just so happened to make a decision that was contrary to his team's interests but we're not going to explain it because I like my theory better."

My bad Ig side-trained onto Ocho IDK how I confused that with Weasel but point stands. Ig creates a one-vote sidetrain. Sure, this protects Kanga, but it's difficult to see this happening + Croc contentment with state of affairs if Axl is also Evil. Edited to add: This jump onto the Octo train. I accept you gave reasons, but fundamentally I'm still looking for votes which took advantage of Weasel starting the train by aggressively pushing Ocho to also push Ocho and you fit the bill. Edited to add 2: ........Why do you feel a second v!Coinshot is less unbalanced than a second v!Mistborn?

My theory in that world was that you were trying to make the case, the EoD was too chaotic, you never successfully finished, and then just posted it because why not. My problem with it being Axl is basically we need to explain complete Elim dgaf. I point out the cycle was relatively calm when it was DF v Axl, and really the only time the pace picked up was at D1 EoD and that was after I was kicking rocks repeatedly about DF's Lurcher claim. Again: Just short of the 36 hour mark, this is the vc. The presence of one Elim on both trains, and Iguana subsequently moving off Kanga to Weasel suggests the Elims were comfortable with the state of affairs. In an E!Axl world, they should not be okay with this! In an E!Axl world, Iguana should be moving onto Dragonfly, or onto Ele or onto Meerkat because the absolute worst state of affairs is for Axl to be one of two lead trains, and for Kanga to be second runner-up! (And we can see that Ig thought so as well because he eventually got off Kanga!) The fact the only urgency at D1 EoD came from me indicates a lot of complacency, and I think even if you don't buy I'm V (you pretty much have to in an E!Axl world since you can't explain Elim complacency as easily if you think I'm V) it's hard to explain why Iguana went completely side-train onto Weasel in a one-guy vote. An Elim does not do that if his teammates are in danger, and he in fact did that before I started yelling about DF.

Edited to add: Here because ninjaed. Like, sure, this is overstating it and we could very well be in a 3 x v!MB world, suppose Ele really took the shot or somehow that person forgot to mention they shot Axl N1. The problem is that 3 x v!MB, 2 x v!Lurcher, 1 x v!CS is...still quite a bit of actions firepower. What do the Elims have? Rioter is strong, yes. Seeker for Elims is more offensively deployed and is odd in a landscape with no PMs. (I suspect the GMs may have slightly overlooked what their MB rules change did because in OG Tyrian, repeats are possible so 3 or 4x MB in a game guarantees that you will have sufficient PMs, whereas here, there are no repeats, so...it is what it is. That may make MB weaker than in an OG Tyrian and that's the balance, IDK. I think Jo and TUM are experienced enough GMs so while I could believe they overlooked it (similar to the Lurcher nerf necessary), I don't really know enough to opine on it.) I just think that fundamentally one team seems to have more visible firepower than the other. There are two solutions to this: A. Someone Village-side is lying B. There's something we're not seeing in the distro. I don't feel confident enough to role-exe btw but I suppose since Rhino has been outed, it is what it is at present. C'est comme ca as they'd say.

I guess if I'm precise I mean your D1 non-vote Ocho casing during the Kanga v Axl standoff, and the D2 Toucan while asking for Tross since that's the CW to Iggy. I go back and forth about how to read it, but I think you could be worried about a last minute saving vote at D1 EoD backfiring since Gecko and I were stated to be there trying to prevent votes from altering the gamestate, and Toucan still is the Iggy CW. Speaking of which, in your world, Toucan and Iggy are E/E. What's your theory of the EoD and no attempted Elim deflection to a third train? I've received 1 x v!MB, and that person successfully claimed the C2 Tin but not the N1 shot. Since you do not claim it, and since I think Ele's hesitance to vote and general sheeping makes them less likely to be a proactive triggerman, I'm left with the alarming possibility a fourth player took the shot. In addition, I'm persuaded by DF's D2 argument that Axl isn't an E shot - there's no real reason to help us clear the CW here when an E!MB could shoot elsewhere. So I lean V on that. Edited to add: Help

I'm voting Rhino for their votes man Idk I would be willing to vote Toucan too for how opportunistic they've been. Tbh I am not sure Ele shot Axl given how behind Ele was and how vascillatory they tended to be, which is why I ask because my concern is: E!Seeker, E!Rioter, E!Kandra 4 x V!MB, 2 x V!Lurcher, 1 x V!CS? This is absolutely not correct and unacceptable with what we have of the Elim side of the distro. Something is very wrong here. IDK I would role-exe but the Village roster is, comparatively, bonkers stacked on roles. Yeah shout out to @A Jo in the Bush / @The Unknown Medallion whoever wrote it, loved it, sorry got distracted by the problem at hand. tfw Ocho is not actually wrong