Araris Valerian

I guess right now I just don't see Shining making such an oddly specific claim.

Now that Shining self-revealed, why would anyone vote Mat? He would only be elim in the scenario where he didn’t reveal his contact until after Vorros flips.

I really don't see any reason for Mat's contact to stay silent at this point. I'd bet there are several players available that can Heal, so we really aren't putting anyone in more danger. And there isn't a dedicated action scan role either, so if the contact is telling the truth, Vorros flips elim, and the contact gets NKed, that is still a great outcome for the village.

Can you specify what your channeling actions were? Are either of them confirmable by another player?

Yeah? Because in the scenario I proposed, there is no contact, it's just you. So anyone you named would counterclaim, and we'd at least know that Vorros was never scanned. @Vorros, did you take a confirmable Channel action during the previous night?

The easy elim play is for you to claim X person scanned Vorros as sending in the kill, but not reveal the identity of X. Then when Vorros flips village, you give some random name as the person you were PMing, and it becomes a 50-50. If you reveal now, then that counterclaim can happen before we flip anyone. If you refuse to share, and Vorros flips village, I'm 100% going to vote you and not your PM contact.

Well then. I suppose at least one of the people on my list was elim then. Xino, Vorros Edit: You should probably reveal the PMer's identity though. That way if Vorros does flip village, we don't get another 50-50 between you and the person you claim sent the message.

Kinda fine since none of my reads are really that strong, and my suspicion relies on several assumptions about the D1 voting.

As for analysis: Wizard was one of two players that didn't vote C1. Usually elims don't want to narrow down groups that contain their members, and Shining is now the only player alive that didn't vote D1, so I'd lean village on them just for that. I'm leaning towards village on Mat, mostly from his aggression toward Vorros. I could be wrong about one of these two, in which case the elims probably had one vote on each primary train. I'm still not a fan of Conquestor's D1, but the vote on Sart is pretty clearly genuine, because he tried to do it during the Night turn. I'd vote for him over either of the two players above, but he's not my first pick for today. I think regardless of Conquestor's alignment there were 2 elims (in a 3 elim world) voting on Illwei. This follows from my own alignment plus me already ruling out Mat and Shining, so one of the main trains would have 2 people, and I don't think both Sart and Xino are elim. Between Sart and Xino, I'd lean elim more on Xino, just because Sart's take on Conquestor feels honest. I would like to hear his thoughts on the NK and on which of the non-Conquestor voters he finds suspicious. Between Vorros, Luckspren, and Devotary, I like Luckspren's latest reads list, it aligns with my thoughts reasonably well while including a healthy suspicion towards yours truly. I already said that elim!Devotary feels a little weird because of the last-minute vote to break a tie that the elims would have known wasn't a tie. In an e!Conquestor world I find that vote even less likely. I'm having a hard time reading Vorros, but he slides into elim by default. Hmm, I guess I think Conquestor, Vorros, and Xino are the elims if we have 3. If there are just 2, I'd bet the most on Xino.

Before I do any analysis, I'm gonna point out that I'm a bit miffed right now, since someone physically blocked me during the Night.

In my back and forth with Conq, he rejected that idea, actually. He basically said that he didn’t consider the implications of his analysis as he was writing it, and he said that he did not especially suspect anyone on the list of 3 that I gave. So my peeve is more that Conq was doing analysis without considering how to help the village with it, which seems like an easy trap for a new/recently returning player to fall into. It could be that or an elim putting up filler.

So you think one of myself, Sart, Xino, and Mat is a Forsaken? My take is that given Illwei's reputation as a dangerous player (and the existence of at least one player familiar with that rep), the elims would have been more happy than usual to vote for her versus some other random villager. I also think that, if we assume the vote manip is due solely to the Forsaken, then Devotary's vote doesn't make as much sense from an elim perspective; it draws attention to her without actually accomplishing anything. So Conq, Vorros, Luck is my current list.

This was me for pretty much all of champs.

That was what I explicitly said, but there is a little more going on here. I was initially trying to push Conquestor into making some firm reads on some of the more active players, and he refused. My push was subtle, but I think it’s relevant that he didn’t take a stance on anyone.

So you think thread control is relatively important this game (compared to other games). In my view, thread control is only important insofar as it determines who gets voted out each cycle. But you also say that vote manip makes voting relatively less important. I disagree, but regardless of that you are being inconsistent. Basically, this is a summary of what I understand you to be saying: The elim kill is less likely to succeed than normal The elims will value thread control more than normal (implied) Thread control lets the elims kill (via voting) more people to make up for (1) Vote manip makes voting (and hence thread control) relatively less important Players vying for thread control are not more or less likely to be elims (implied) The elims don’t care about (2) So what do you actually think? Do the rules overemphasize the importance of thread control/votes for the elims, or not? If so, why do you think players actually going for thread control is NAI? And if not, why bring that stuff up in the first place? You say that understanding the rules is important to finding elims, but you are backpedaling when I point out what your interpretations imply about the current game state. And that’s what I find suspicious. And lastly, why does vote manip make voting less important? If there are 2 votes placed, and a single vote manip action used, that action controls 50% of the vote. But if 10 votes are placed, and a single vote manip action is used, the action controls only 10% of the vote. So by the numbers, for any amount of vote manip, votes placed in thread become relatively more important, not less. Edit: It’s possible that I’ve subscribed a bit to the Assuredness Movement of Rhetorical Theory in this post, so take any overconfidence/aggression with that in mind

Wizard I'm going to park my vote on Conquestor @Conquestor at least until I get a response from this. If your rule analysis gives you conclusions that you are disregarding, then it's performative and hence elimmy.

I think it’s a bit of a distraction to talk about the roles a whole lot now, given that we have a 48 hour night cycle to strategize all we want. Since people have finite time and willingness to post, we should focus on voting now and leave the other stuff for when there isn’t as much else to say. Your point about thread control is relevant though. Do you think that players like Illwei, Mat, and myself are more suspicious because we’ve had relatively more influence on the thread, given that your analysis suggests the elims would be forced into that?

I literally said I was voting on Wizard because I agree with Illwei. Hence, my vote had the exact same level of explanation as hers did.

Yeah, I was subtly indicating that I had not, in fact, asked that question in the elim doc for nefarious purposes.

Is there a reason you singled out Illwei’s vote on Wizard over mine?

Oh yeah, if the elims do have a Forsaken, and everyone votes, then we can force the elims to burn an action on some vote manip or risk us catching the Forsaken. Since voting is generally good anyways, I don’t see any downsides here.

This is a bit more relevant because weaves can physically block players, and killing via weave requires a fair bit of luck, even if linking is used to reduce the difficulty. The faction kill is a physical action, according to TUN in the game approval PM. I'm thinking it's dangerous to assume that all of the roles are included in this game. One of the concerns I brought up in approval was that the combination of 3 village roles plus the downside of the Forsaken would potentially allow the village to mechanically solve the game. I do agree at least about the Myrdraal though, since that gives the elims only a single safe link option, and my gut feeling is that the elims will be unable to weave Lightning on their own. I also agree with Illwei on Wizard, so that's where my vote goes for now.

Welcome!

I'll make sure to IM the first game after you come back