Quick Fix Game 11: Cultists in a Snowstorm

[Bort he/him]

damnation, forgot it was PM voting.

[Metacognition he/him]

Jain's vote still deserves a look at, in that right, but I think that we're barking up the wrong tree. 

I'd rather that we start looking elsewhere so that we don't get too focused on this issue. 

 

So I'm calling everyone who basically just "called in" over the last cycle. Anyone that "just checked in" or "Seen and Spoke" or anything like that.

 

You all waited a cycle to gather information; via the thread and/or PMs. Thus, you should have some information by now, right? We can't wait on you to finally have information later on, right? 

 

So I really want to hear from those that were pretty silent the first cycle. STINK, Orlok, BB, Venture, Kaid, Phatt (sort of) and Shallan. If I missed someone, please add them.

 

Come on, guys. We need you. With out your help, we're going to lose. So give us an inkling of what you're thinking by this point. Anything is better than nothing....

[Bort he/him]

Out of everyone, I'm most suspicious of Panda and Creccio. Why vote for no deaths? Surely that just helps the Cultists?

 

I know there were arguments made last cycle about not lynching people, but doesn't that take away one of our biggest sources of information?

[Lightsworn Panda he/him]

The exact words I used in more PM were:

 

"I vote for no-one"

 

Hopefully, that clears things up. I hand't intended it to be "No-Death" vote, but considering the circumstances, it may be too late for it to be rectified. 

[Bort he/him]

It doesn't really clear things up.

 

How can you say 'I vote for no-one' and not vote for no death? Surely voting for no-one is a vote for no death?

 

And yeah, being the next cycle and all, I'm pretty sure it is too late to be rectified

[Kaid he/him]

Yeah, anyone who would've been dead can't be dead now, just like those who die can't be brought back just because of a simple misunderstanding.

[Kaid he/him]

At this point, I'd just like to say, I abstained from voting because I had no strong suspicions of who to kill. So I just did not put in a vote. But, for now I'm not going to read too deeply into creccio or panda because I don't think a cultist would not vote for someone. I mean, we could easily look at the two who voted for someone else and say they're cultists and colluded in trying to kill an innocent person. The cultists would gain much more from a first day mislynch than we would so yeah, I don't think they would vote for no one.

[Bort he/him]

I tend to agree with you, Kaid. I don't think Panda or Creccio are our Cultists. I am still curious about Panda's vote though.

 

I'm also rather curious about Meta's suspicions of Alvron. He's mentioned them a few times, but shared no details. Meta, please share in case you are attacked again tonight? Also, how come you didn't vote for him if you were suspicious of him?

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

Kaloo sat in his room, thinking on the past days events. What have I got myself into? First, a mangled body was found and it's realized we're stuck with a bunch of crazy fanatical Cultists. Then, if that's not bad enough, tensions got so high that there was talk of sending someone out into the blizzard, which would be almost certain death. I don't see a way around it though. It's either us, or them. After everyone had finally settled down, that one guy was almost turned into a sacrifice! I can't say I know why they picked him, but I don't think I want to get closer to him to find out. There's something........................strange about him. He keeps eyeing people in this weird way. It gives me creeps. I'll just have to stay alert the best I can. I sure do hope this is over soon.......

 

 

So I read over the thread, but I didn't really find a whole lot to comment on. One thing I thought might be worth mentioning is that Creccio asked for Meta to be scanned and then he was attacked. Maybe he wanted the scanner to waste a scan? I'm not really surprised by the attack on Meta, and I don't know if we can learn anything from it, but I'm just trying to think of possible scenarios that haven't been mentioned yet. 

 

With the players that did the no-vote, as far as I can tell, no one knew of the no-death vote thing, since Maill never said anything about it in thread, which means no one asked about it. So I don't really think that is something to be suspicious of. Maybe the fact that they didn't vote could be seen as suspicious, but it doesn't seem like they were trying to save anyone by doing that.

 

With the news about the Soldier not protecting the same person for 2 Cycles in a row, that makes it possible for the Cultists to actually have one. I'm still not sure if they would have one or not, since it's still a really powerful role for them to have, but it certainly allows for the possibility.

 

For my vote, I'm going to put one on Bridge Boy for his quietness. Do you have any opinions on any of these matters?

[Clanky he/him]

Lightsworn Panda, on 25 Nov 2015 - 12:45 AM, said:

Sorry, I don't seem to understand. I've never said that I didn't want anyone to die. I believe you're questioning me for a "no-vote" like Meta. My reasons have already been stated.

I was referring to your vote for no-one to die and I didn't know how that occurred at the time. Now that we have a better understanding of how the no-death votes came about it makes more sense.

A question for those who did send in a vote for no-one: Why did you send in a vote at all? I'm just curious because if I were going to vote for no-one I wouldn't have sent anything in to Maill regarding a vote.

EDIT: Also now that soldiers can't protect the same person every night we will have to consider the possibility that the cultists do have a soldier. Potentially this rule was changed since the Cultists do have a soldier and Maill didn't think about how they could guarantee a cultist victory with it.

Edited November 25, 2015 by Clanky

[Bort he/him]

How could they guarantee a Cultist victory if the Soldier could protect the same person night after night?

 

Surely that doesn't apply to lynches?

[Clanky he/him]

Yes it does apply to lynches which is what makes it so powerful and dangerous in the hands of a cultist. It's an easy way to protect a cultist we tried to lynch by saying "you don't want to kill your own soldier!". 

[Bort he/him]

That's pretty overpowered in a QF game, I feel. Even every other cycle seems too powerful for the Cultists to have access to one.

[Clanky he/him]

We can counteract the soldier slightly if we actually do our votes in secret and then they don't know who to protect. The other option is to get the priest to check anyone saved from the lynch by the soldier and then we can lynch them twice. It isn't ideal but if we get multiple soldiers of our own then it isn't that overpowered. 

 

Maill also could have just changed the rules so that we wouldn't completely discount the fact that a soldier could be evil so that anyone proven a soldier isn't also proven town.

[Kaid he/him]

He could have also just changed it because there may be more than one soldier. If there are two soldiers and they're constantly protecting themselves, the cultists couldn't kill them and it would help the town immensely to have two people that just can't die. Now they have to pick who else to protect asides from themselves, meaning they have to figure out who to trust and they have to participate rather than just sitting in the background not participating because they are always safe.

[Hellscythe he/him]

Kind of Kaid. If there are two soldiers on the good side that know eachother they can just swap every other night. One night them self. One night the other soldier. One night them self. One night the other soldier.

 

This rule was made because there IS an evil soldier that can protect himself endlessly making the game impossible to win.

 

Unfortunately for us it means we should probably not tell everyone who we're trying to lynch because if we end up picking a traitor he will just be protected and we'll have to waste one lynch getting them killed.

Edited November 25, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Kaid he/him]

Hellscythe I don't think it absolutely means there is a cultist soldier. Because even if there wasn't, taking away the ability to guard yourself every night forces the soldiers to become more involved, and to try to find another soldier is dangerous because you could easily give yourself away to a cultist. Sure, they could do the protect trade off, but its a much harder win condition when you can't just always protect yourself. Now, there is the possibility of there being a cultist soldier, but I don't think its an absolute.

[Clanky he/him]

Kind of Kaid. If there are two soldiers on the good side that know eachother they can just swap every other night. One night them self. One night the other soldier. One night them self. One night the other soldier.

 

This rule was made because there IS an evil soldier that can protect himself endlessly making the game impossible to win.

 

Unfortunately for us it means we should probably not tell everyone who we're trying to lynch because if we end up picking a traitor he will just be protected and we'll have to waste one lynch getting them killed.

 

How are you so sure that there is a cultist soldier? There are other possibilities and unless you have some inside information about this there is no way to be sure. This whole post seems just like you are trying to make people scared to share their suspicions. Even if there is a cultist soldier we can't let that stop us from discussing, accusing and defending people in the thread.

 

Sure I can see us not needing to post our votes on the main thread but we still need to discuss who we want to lynch here. Without that it won't matter if the cultists are all soldiers cause we can't catch them without talking about it. 

 

I'm going to be putting my vote on hellscythe now by the way. 

[Elkanah he/him]

After much study and wasted time, I have determined that the code is not an anagram and I can't think of an acronym for the four bolded letters. The carriage returns are what I thought would help the most, but I don't have any more time to try and crack it. Kudos rulo. Your skills are beyond me.

Also Yes, I voted hastily yesterday I feel like a lynch gives us more info than no lynch.

[Creccio he/him]

After much study and wasted time, I have determined that the code is not an anagram and I can't think of an acronym for the four bolded letters. The carriage returns are what I thought would help the most, but I don't have any more time to try and crack it. Kudos rulo. Your skills are beyond me.

Also Yes, I voted hastily yesterday I feel like a lynch gives us more info than no lynch.

 

What info would you get from me dying exactly?

 

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

I ought to apologise for my inactivity this far.

I have had a large degree of work this week - both progressing in a job application process, but most taxingly with coursework.

I didn't have time last cycle to set down my thoughts, but feel strongly about cycle 1 lynches - as indeed at this point.

It was this belief that led me to place a vote on Creccio, for his opposition to the sole source of information held by the village in day one - not a particularly sound vote, I'll admit - but a vote nevertheless.

I do agree with Clanky's criticism of Hellscythe - that he is advocating closing down discussion in the thread - and unless I can think of a better vote before the end of the cycle, or anyone can convince me otherwise, I shall be placing my vote on Hellscythe

Edited November 25, 2015 by Orlok

[Creccio he/him]

Has anyone deciphered the message or did we just say its random letters?

[Mailliw73 he/him]

I changed the Soldier because I realized that, in the case of a Traitor soldier, that person would be impossible to kill, if they do exist, but also because in the case of a Trader Soldier, the Cultists would have no chance to kill them either. The clarification should not impact the likelihood of Soldier(s) being on either side.

[Hellscythe he/him]

My aim was not to "advocate closing down discussion in the thread" I was preparing us for a worst case scenario where they do have a soldier and we do have to play around a soldier because if we play under the assumption that they don't have a soldier and they actually do it'll be much worse for us than if we just prepare for the worst.

[Metacognition he/him]

What info would you get from me dying exactly?

 

 

Quite a lot, actually. We get to see if you were an Eliminator or not first and foremost. This also allows us to take whatever you said previously within the light of your reveal. This is why it is so important that people actually discuss and share information and suspicions in thread. If you were innocent, we can take your suspicions into account as we continue the hunt for the Eliminators. 

 

We also get to see the results of the voting. Look at the situation we have right now, with the No Death Votes. It is basically the same thing as a tied vote where no one dies as well. Right now, you and Jain look suspicious because we don't know what the actual results would have been. The fact that there was not a death means that either the votes are meaningless or that they could mean everything. If you had died and turned up innocent, then Jain's vote wouldn't look all that odd. If you turned up as an Eliminator, then his vote would look even more suspicious. 

So, to recap, here's a list of all the things we get due to the lynch. We get all of this whether it is Day 1 or Day10. This is one of the reasons why I just don't understand people that don't ever want a lynch: 

 

• We get the lynchee's alignment (most of the time) 
• We get the lynchee's role (some of the time)
• We get clarity in their motivations
• We get clarity in their suspicions
• We get clues into the motivations of others around them
• We get clarity in their votes
• We get clarity in the votes of others
• We get clues to the identities of other trustworthy/suspicious people
• We get a better understanding of the overall picture

What we get with a no lynch: 

 

• Nothing. Everything is still up in the air. No real trust is formed because you have no clue as to the motivations behind their actions and words.