Lumgol
-
Posts
458 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Lumgol
-
Ok, so now that I think about it, I really don't like Ark's voting pattern. He seems to just be switching his vote whenever someone makes a statement about who to vote on without saying any actual reasoning for it. I understand that he might not have time to analyze the whole thread but still wants to become bonded, but I'd like for Ark to at least put in a little bit of effort into choosing someone for himself to vote on and providing some reasoning behind it. Ark is not a brand new player and I'm really expecting more than just "I have no idea who to vote for, but I'll vote for [that person]". I also know that I'm biased because he's currently bandwagoning on me, but that doesn't excuse the fact that if you're going to vote for someone, you should have some kind of motive behind it. And if that motive is to do the bare minimum needed to get bonded, well that's okay, but I don't like it. Dapper. Ark.
-
I have voted on Dapper as well as Ark. Also, I didn't know Dapper was new, so that changes my opinion somewhat. Edit: was ninja'd and didn't realize. Sorry
-
Fifth also sent me a PM asking for a roleclaim, and I have claimed back, but I'm still on his suspicion list. I think it's because my role just happens to be one of the ones that's harder to prove, even though it's possible in the long term. For now, I'm going to tentatively vote Dapper. They're too active to be inactive, but their posts just aren't constructive and "it's my playstyle" isn't an excuse. This lack of serious discussion aside from a few brief lines could be covering up elim activity, and even if Dapper is village (and I know this might come off as cruel but that's really not my intention), they're not driving discussion and the village won't suffer if Dapper is lynched. Again, sorry if this isn't phrased very nicely and I hope my point comes across. This is still a tentative vote and I'd be willing to change if I find someone to be more suspicious.
-
This would have been the second game in a row where I would get lynched C1, so I panicked. It really wasn't necessary. But I didn't know that at the time.
-
So, as a whole, the votes swung rapidly to me, and then later, they went away just as quickly. However, some of the people who voted for me (mainly Fifth and Levitaph) have stated that they still suspect me. I think that generally, it's good for elims to convert people who are active, but not suspected. This certainly doesn't clear me though, as this situation is highly IKYK and despite apparent suspicion, people seem hesitant to actually vote on me after the lynch swung away D1. So, I don't think that people would want to convert me, especially after the situation D1, but even saying this might cause them to be more likely to do so.
-
mafia championship A Knock from Outside the Cosmere
Lumgol replied to Metacognition's topic in Sanderson Elimination
Furamirionind, I bestow upon you the light of determination against all odds. I wish you the resilience to keep on springing back even when things go horribly wrong. Best of luck! I know you can do this! -
As for Xino and Ark, they didn't post at all D1 if I remember correctly. Snipexe is the only one who posted but never voted. So, Xino and Ark just seem generally inactive.
-
No problem! Use whatever terms you're comfortable with. And yes, being anonmously killed by the mafia during the night is generally something that happens in SE.
-
Alright, some thoughts on a few players as promised, in no particular order. Sart: Starts off by responding to both of my posts, and also votes on me. This seems a lot more like an early attempt to start discussion than being convicted in voting for me. In his second post, he switches his vote to CadCom because he wants him to post more constructive, discussion-generating things since he can post in the first place. So, he seems to be primarily trying to generate discussion and action and that includes voting on people. Seems pretty NAI to me. However, as Elandera has pointed out, he seemed to only have been targeting CadCom, and multiple people this game have done checking in posts and similar things and Sart hasn't addressed them at all. Overall, I agree that contributing content is important especially at the start, but I disagree with voting on someone just because they checked in. I don't think that this behavior warrants a vote on Sart, though - this move is kind of strange but I don't think it's an elim thing. Getting into mechanics here (sorry), but as for his point about killing anyone who turns out to have multiple lives, I'd say that makes sense. The presence of multiple lives means that someone has a 50% chance of being elim, which I'd say is worth it. Rath: First checks in and suggests sharing if the Stormfather fails to bond someone. Then, he responds to my post about whether we should prioritize killing Sja-anat or her converts, saying the general conclusion most people have come to. He follows by voting on me, and providing an explanation of what he finds suspicious. He emphasizes not being overly sure about me being suspicious and mostly lynching me for the sake of action. Although this approach can be used by elims to mask the fact that they don't actually suspect anyone and know that everyone's village, I find no problem with this unsureness as this is D1. Anyways, Rath eventually retracts his vote on me, without much explanation of why I was more cleared, which I'd honestly like to hear but I don't find the lack of explanation suspicious as you also said that you "knew what it was like to be lynched for your early playstyle" (might not be the exact wording). So, overall, a pretty neutral/village read so far. Rath sounds pretty careful about jumping to conclusions in general, but is also pushing himself to act more without overthinking (as shown by his statement that he voted on me partially to avoid procrastinating votes), so I don't think I can criticize him either way. Whew, that was only 2 players and took WAY longer than expected. More may or may not be coming later. TL;DR While I don't agree with Sart's vote on CadCom, his general strategy and reasoning behind his posts appeals to me and I don't think his behavior is suspicious enough to warrant a vote. Although some people have a problem with Rath's unsure tone and seeming hedginess, I see him actively trying to take more action and I find his tone more logical than suspiciously apologetic.
-
Fifth, I appreciate your backtracking on my vote. While my vote on you was primarily self-defense as it was the only other lynch going on at the time, your tunneling on me also made me feel justified in voting for you. However, I think that I have no real reason to vote for you now. Poke vote on Coop. @Coop772, I'd like to hear more about your reasoning. Your vote has just seemed like a bandwagon vote more than anything else. This sounds a lot like the fact that there's *several* people criticizing me, instead of 1 or 2, is more important than the arguments themselves. I'd definitely want to hear what exactly has made you suspect me, because otherwise, it just sounds like you're jumping on the bandwagon while conveniently avoiding explanation. Vote list so far (correct me if I'm wrong): Lumgol (4) - Sart, Levitaph, Rathmaskal, Coop Fifth (2) - Shqueeves, Fura Coop (2) - Randuir, Lumgol Rath (1) - Lopen I'll try to write up a cremmy attempt at player analysis soon, since it was requested of me, but I'll just get this post out first.
-
There's no need to sound so apologetic
-
Alright, I'll talk about that post as well. I still haven't covered my rationale behind that one and it seems to be generating a fair amount of suspicion, which in retrospect, I understand completely. Basically I was imagining a hypothetical scenario, in a future cycle. There are 2 players that people are generally finding suspicious, and for simplicity, let's assume that they're both actually elims. People decide to lynch Player 1, and they survive. The players assume that Player 1 is Sja-anat (again, I'll assume that they actually are Sja-anat). Next turn, neither Player 1 nor Player 2 seem any less suspicious. I started wondering to myself whether it would be optimal to lynch Player 1 or Player 2 in this case. I'd say I agree with what most people are saying, that what matters is that we're lynching an elim and whether they're Sja-anat or not is less relevant. As for your point about this driving discussion away from more useful things, I disagree. Just because I said something or brought up a point doesn't mean that people have to talk about it or avoid talking about other things. Adding to a discussion does not have to negate or steer away from other things being discussed in the present or future. Either way, this was certainly not my goal in posting what I did, whether people find it suspicious or not.
-
@Elandera, I'm honestly amazed at how far you've managed to survive and be trusted for so long. You really deserved to win there (although it's still great that you almost did). As for dying so early, that was honestly on me. I didn't realize that one post would generate so much suspicion on myself. However I feel like since you guys decided to bus/distance and stuff, that gained a lot more trust for Elandera in the long term, which paid off for me at least (I can't speak for CadCom). So, it was really fun watching this game fold out from an elim perspective. Even if I did have rather bad luck that one time. Well played everyone, and thank you @Sart for GMing!
-
That's a really great point Sart. That logic makes me especially willing to trust the less active people who want to be active but happen to have a lot of other things going on. However, nowhere did I state that lynching inactives should be prioritized over lynching blatantly suspicious people. All I was saying that a lack of care towards activity could mean that the player couldn't become bonded and thus didn't have that incentive to post and vote. In situations like these, I see how posting like that would draw elim attention; however, I feel like lynching "super helpful" posters would actually hurt the elims more than it would help them, since it would make them look blatantly evil (voting on someone who was just trying to help). So, I don't see how it would require being super brave or super evil to post like that, because any elim attention that that playstyle generates will very easily be seen as elim. Why is it suddenly a problem that I'm analyzing mechanics instead of players? 1) I've never been particularly big on player analysis in past games, instead choosing to look more closely at roles and mechanics. And, in past games, I've nearly always been village. So I don't see how focusing on mechanics makes me more likely to be elim. Furthermore, player analysis would give elims plenty of opportunities to frame people and lead mislynches. 2) As for player analysis, there isn't much to analyze as it is D1. So far, the only things that have happened are my posts and people's responses to them, RP and posts about how active people are able to be, and Devotary's plan to try to create a Radiant out of Essences (which seems quite interesting, by the way, but doesn't provide much as far as trusting or suspicion goes), and Shqueeves's random vote on you. Speaking of that random vote, yes, it is a self-preservation vote, and it was meant to be this way. As much as I dislike the concept of randomly voting, it seems like the only viable option at this point for me to stay alive. I don't have enough information on you so far to trust or suspect you (except the fact that you've just voted on me which makes me want to suspect you but that's a more emotional reason that I try to avoid). If you flip village, then it'll be bad luck that I got rid of a fellow villager due to self-preservation. It'll be unfortunate if that happens, but again, I'd like to stay alive.
-
In the interests of self defense, I'll vote Fifth since the only other vote so far is on me. However, if a better target comes up I'll likely switch my vote.
-
So, another point I'd like to have some of your opinions on: Should we focus more on finding Sja-anat and eliminating her extra lives (and thus potential conversions) first, or focus on killing the converts, so that we can at least try to prevent the elim team from growing? If converts are constantly killed, Sja-anat will either be forced to use up her extra lives to rebuild her team (thus weakening her and requiring less time to lynch her), or she'll have to keep her extra lives but stick to a smaller team or fly solo. However, trying to lynch Sja-anat from the beginning will reduce her opportunities to convert early on, which would be quite a blow. Especially this round, where we don't know if there even are converts, Sja-anat is the obvious lynch target. Who do you guys think we should focus on for the rest of the game?
-
Well, I guess I'll kick off the game right away. So with the whole activity-makes-bonding thing, I feel like if someone doesn't post as much that can sorta be a cause for suspicion since I think Sja-anat can't be bonded? But then they could also be the Stormfather, or just plain really busy so I'm not really sure. However, lynching inactives is generally considered a good idea and especially in this game. Any other thoughts? Edit: I reread the rules and the Stormfather can be bonded, while Sja-anat can't. That makes inactivity, or at least a lack of care towards activity, slightly more suspicious.
-
My RP character will be Hjalar, a lightspren.
-
Signing up! Haven't come up with an RP name yet.
-
mafia championship A Knock from Outside the Cosmere
Lumgol replied to Metacognition's topic in Sanderson Elimination
@Furamirionind, don't worry about it! You're a great player and you totally deserve your nomination. Experience is just a number. -
@Elandera, no problem! I had a feeling you'd make a great teammate
-
Welp. You should have seen me panicking in the dead doc about how the game was about to end but not everyone was JOE. However, I think this was really fun and my role, however annoying, was extremely fun to carry out. I was also disappointed at the lack of enthusiasm for converting people shown by some of the other JOEs. I think that with more coordination and teamwork from everyone, we could have won. (Although I AM counting this as a semi-victory since I was village and all that.) Anyways, great job on catching the spammers super fast!
-
Since there's not really enough information on everyone yet, as it's cycle 1, I think it makes the most sense to vote on less active people (Xino).
-
@Cadmium Compounder, I think it would be a great idea to take the crab. I'll reach out to you in PM so we can maybe discuss who to use it on and why.
-
I got this, I was just announcing my plans in thread. Thanks for clarifying anyway.
