Hey everyone, I will out out of town from Wednesday to Sunday so I will have limited time to play then.
4 Likes
Ok, I don’t want to hog my turn forever. I haven’t had as much time as I did before.
However these are my toughts:
-
I believe duchess @Gia
is a settler-believer. That is, she’s either settler or amnesiac. I am quite confident in this assumption. In fact I have a very strong gameplay reason for this. -
I think astrologer @Jon_Ko
quite possibly is also a settler-believer. I am somewhat less confident in this assumption. There are reasons to believe one way or the other. -
I mentioned before that my assumptions seemed to constantly fail, however, as I also said think I found the weak point in them. I believe now that merchant @Vsotvep
is quite probably a convinced rebel. In fact I think there’s one scenario that can explain away everything that has happened so far, but I don’t want to just sit around and confirm my bias to myself.
I want to open this discussion again because my next move depends on it.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on the matter, while I prepare a more… extended explanation (no percentages this time, though).
4 Likes
Who is the amnesiac? I’m looking at the land of Gobania and I do not find the answer. I shall try to find it in the night sky.
Unless… Duchess @Gia, did you have time to consult with your courtiers yet? Do you still claim it isn’t you?
2 Likes
I don’t agree with all you say, but I don’t think it matters much.
I work with the assumption that @Barbanaira has been telling the truth about being a rebel. Lying about that as a settler would be a devastatingly bad strategy I think.
With that assumption alone - if I am not mistaken - the only open question is if @Gia of @Jon_Ko is the last rebel. Who the amnesiac is might be interesting for analysing the motivation for past behaviour, but with only one bit of information missing I am past looking at that.
Like you I also think that it’s more likely that @Jon_Ko is the last rebel. I already made a suggestion for the next 3 moves (big move, pass, pass) that has the potential to confirm that with zero cost or reject it at the cost of one pass.
4 Likes
Quod dixi, dixi. Of that, you believe what you want to believe.
3 Likes
I think it was settled @Vsotvep was the amnesiac? So I must be the last settler.
1 Like
He could be, it could also be a deception by the rebels.
2 Likes
What do you disagree with Sir @richyfourtytwo ? Please tell me the reason.
Yes. But the exact nature of this is unknown. We cannot simply assume that they can’t be amnesiac.
The problem that I see with this suggestion is that a (self known) rebel really has no reason to follow, so it is basically a free move for team rebels.
Arguably, I could even say that any player, regardless, would have no intention (edit: sorry, I meant to say incentive) to follow.
Consider this: for the sake of argument, say I am astrologer @Jon_Ko and I was told to be a settler. Now, I do not know that I am for certain, as I could be amnesiac. If I pass, that is a bad move for my own team regardless of which one it is. So therefore I might prefer to play anywhere else, particularly if it makes ambiguous sense (that way I help whatever team I’m in).
This means, we would learn very little if that happens.
6 Likes
Let’s suppose @Vsotvep was a Rebel-belieber from the start, and everything about pretending to be the amnesiac is a ruse. Would it really make sense for @Vsotvep to make this deception? If this were the case, then it could be possible that the actual amnesiac is either @Gia or @Jon_Ko (i.e., they are both Settler-beliebers, but only one of them is an actual settler). If @Vsotvep’s claim to be the amnesiac is convincing to them, then it would effectively cause them both to (temporarily, until confirmed otherwise) believe that they are settlers and hence help that team.
I agree with @Leira that it is a bad idea for any player to pass.
4 Likes
Or course it is. But that doesn’t mean asking them do so and letting them know we confirmed settlers will identify the outstanding rebel this way is a bad idea. I think that the chances that @Vsotvep is not the amnesiac are slim. If he is, passing is a good strategy for the remaining settler of the tow. If he isn’t, passing is a good strategy for one of them and a bad strategy for the other. That’s better than 75%-25%. If I was one of them and I’d be asked to pass by the setlers and I was told to be a settler, I would definitely pass.
3 Likes
Also: we’ve been asking people to throw in all the time to gather information. These throwins always were bad moves looked at in isolation. Why is suggesting bad moves for that same reason suddenly a bad idea? 
4 Likes
Because a throw-in helps to gather firm information, by checking whether or not a capture occurs. It is a bad play, but that is somewhat balanced by gaining information.
Passing is bad play and it does not give any firm information. Also, I think that everyone has a very reasonable explanation for not wanting to pass, in order to play somewhere else, so refusing to pass does not give any firm evidence that someone is or is not a rebel.
Instead of asking people to pass, I think that it makes much more sense to ask them to play moves that test capture or set up a future capture.
5 Likes
I think this would have been wrong if all 4 confirmed settlers had agreed to this strategy without much discussion. Alas, that has not happened, so it is probably right now. I retract my suggestion and await better ones. (No bad feelings, btw, I realise what I wrote might be taken as that, but not intended.)
2 Likes
@Leira are you ready to make a move? Writing the coordinates here is sufficient, I can take care of posting the position.
4 Likes
Here’s an explanation of what I think is going on. Let’s call it a sequel.
Chapter 1: The Queen of Coins
Why countess @Gia was told to be a settler
One of the first things I noticed in the game was the empty triangle at the top right corner. I made several conjectures about it, but they all boiled down to this: No one would make undisputably terrible moves if they know the true state of the board
Just by contradiction, let’s just assume that countess @Gia was a rebel and knew that she was a rebel (a rebel belieber). She would then have known from the beginning that sir @richyfourtytwo 
and astrologer @Jon_Ko were her enemies. However, by turn 7 we would arrive at this position
A dangerous looking settlement, even by the standards of a daredevil like the countess, specially when moves around D4 are still open. I don’t think she could have known what she was getting into, or she’d have settled somewhere else.
I could put forward more arguments, but I think this one suffices. Therefore, she’s either amnesiac or a settler.
Chapter 2: The Star
Why astrologer @Jon_Ko was probably told to be a settler.
The case of the astrologer is a bit more difficult to ascertain. Red settlements have always made sense either way. So, again, just by contradiction, let’s assume the astrologer is a rebel belieber and see why that doesn’t make a lot of sense.
-
The astrologer invited hermit @Leira
(yours truly) to speak, at a point in this battle where almost all settlers were convinced that I was a rebel. Leaving personal considerations aside, I take this as a sign that the astrologer was looking to get more information from me, something that wouldn’t make much sense for a convinced rebel, as it would be counter productive.
Incidentally, I must point out that merchant @Vsotvep warned forebodingly: “be careful what you wish for”. He did not want me to rebuke (I’ll come back to this). -
The astrologer has almost always “antagonized” merchant Vsotvep’s
logic. I use air quotes here because I believe it’s not really antagonism, but disagreement, from the astrologer’s point of view. Of course, this could be all a ruse. However, the proposition here is that merchant Vsotvep is the amnesiac and, in that case, antagonizing him so much would only help to confuse him, which seems like a bad strategy for team rebel. -
My most concrete argument comes at move 20. Again, assuming Jon Ko is rebel we arrive at this position:
But then Astrologer Jon Ko said this:
This partially instigated the merchant to play at L10, hypothetically leaving this position:
I think we can all appreciate the empty triangle here, in all its magnificent terribleness. This would a bad wasted settlement for rebels, and there is no way around it (there being no other justification for it).
In short if astrologer Ko was indeed a rebel belieber their strategy would seem dubious at least (for someone who sees the true state of the board). Therefore they’re probably either amnesiac or settler.
Chapter 3: The Hierophant and The Magician
Barbalva the White (@Barbanaira) 
and Little @MystWalker 
are both convinced rebels.
What do they tell us about the war?
We know this duo has been conspiring together to bring heresy into our lands. They have both insisted, directly or indirectly, that countess @Gia is on team black.
Now, they have every reason to lie with every last piece of information that remains uncertain and so we must look for other clues.
Let’s start with the antipope ahem I mean the white cleric . So far his moves make sense, securing the corner, confirming himself to his team, etc.
There is a problem with his reveal, and it has to do with timing. He revealed before my turn. It would have been very easy to just wait until I waste another move, and then reveal when it is his turn (immediately afterwards), if needed.
I think he did it for two reasons: First, he takes the merchant for the amnesiac (a mistake, in my opinion). Second, maybe he overestimates what I know (or how convinced my teammates are), and wanted to influence my move in a different direction. This only makes sense if he wants me to leave @Gia’s stones alone, because that was my stated plan.
Little @MystWalker (the deceiver) paints a different picture. Not destroying the camp of zealots in the north east seems risky. However, it’s not a terrible wager in exchange for a land grab. This is what the board would look like to them at move 28
The countess’s settlements aren’t safe, but they aren’t dead either. Compare this with capturing but black extending towards south east. It is not a great prospect.
In summary, I believe this scenario is very plausible.
Chapter 4: 30 Silver Coins
A story of betrayal, or how Merchant @Vsotvep knew it all from the beginning
The merchant has been quite insistent that his cooperation with team settler is proof that he must believe to be a settler himself. He even came up with a plan.
Well, let’s take a look at the plan, shall we, and compare it with the position at move 9 when the plan was created (bear in mind that by this point viscount @yebellz 
had already revealed to be a spy, so the rebels had full knowledge of the board):
I find it very suspicious that he manages to make @Gia’s stones alive from a very likely dead position. Added benefit: everyone is none the wiser until the end-game. Having all rebel stones alive seems like a good bargain.
Everything else continues to be suspicious after that. The merchant, after all, has not wasted a single move himself (in this scenario). First take a corner, then capture, and finally the so called “throw-in” which in truth was the only hope to save the countess’s settlements.
I think he saw everything unfold, and was pretty frustrated by Little @MystWalker’s refusal to capture. Indeed, the only way to explain why this was necessary would have required to reveal who’s who. It was a lose-lose situation.
Chapter 5: Justice
A final compromise
Of course, there is a lot of speculation to all of this. I find this scenario very plausible, but not infallible. However, I think I’ve found a solution. One last settlement that needs to be placed, possibly the last wasted move.
I think it is impossible for astrologer @Jon_Ko to be the amnesiac. Otherwise, merchant @Vsotvep’s move at L10 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. So, the astrologer either knows or he doesn’t[1]. I’m going to potentially atari the countess’s stones and, in his turn, the astrologer will have to capture.
If he does, everything is revealed. If he doesn’t, I will consider them to be the enemy. It is not a coercion, but rather, a move that makes sense both ways. Clearly, for a rebel astrologer it would make no sense to play there, whereas for a settler astrologer the capture secures another corner and consolidates influence.
Since the player to move after astrologer Ko is Madman @NeilAgg 
, he would not need to answer any threat by Barbalva the White (@Barbanaira) , since the madman can do that on the next turn.
Here are the two possible scenarios, side by side:
Special Thanks
To Madman @NeilAgg whose effort have helped secure almost one quarter of the board, but whose card I never got to show. Here it is, my friend, you can have it; keep up the good work.
(Apologies to to viscount @yebellz, but this card fits his character better than yours)
TL ; DR
I’ll make an atari move. If @Jon_Ko helps with the capture, they are friend. Else they are foe.
Another contingent of Zealots move to surround the countess territories. Soon we will know where everyone stands
Leira plays "L12"
9 Likes
The note at [1]: Sorry, I worded this incorrectly. I meant to say that he either knows to be a rebel, or, if he doesn’t, he is not a rebel. There being no middle ground. He knows his true alignment because it is exactly what he was told.
5 Likes
A move that may or may not be wasted, but that will tell us a lot very quickly. 
5 Likes
No capture occurs.
5 Likes
7 Likes
Let me say that I have been monetarily convinced to portray myself as a rebel, but I am personally intrigued by the hypothesis that @Barbanaira is a settler.
Suppose @Barbanaira plays C7 (but it could be anywhere else) and @Jon_Ko 
goes along with @Leira’s plan. Under this hypothesis, no capture occurs, and hence Jon Ko will correctly believe to be a member of team White and @yebellz will believe to be a member of team Black, and the amnesiac @Leira will be thoroughly confused, making it hard for the other rebels to make believable moves, especially in defending the lower right, for example.
Compare the beliefs of the settlers & amnesiac in this scenario:
to the actual board:
Remember that Barbalva personally prefers a lack of clarity, due to earlier admission:
4 Likes