Micro 1082 - I’m the Real Tracker (Day 4)

[JasonWazza]

@Jason:

Are you happy or sad at the State of Origin result today?

Hadn't been keeping up but *quick google search* yeah Queensland winning is fine by me

I'm Victorian, so it's not like I have a major dog in that race.

VOTE: DeltaBreedy

For assuming i would even care about state of origin.

[JasonWazza]

I mean if it makes me sound more town go for it.

[JasonWazza]

Well then G'Day little lady, i think we ought to lead this town to a good place, so i suggest that after each night that passes it might be worthwhile to claim the person we targeted to the entire town, so that we are able to have our information gatherers gather more useful information.

[JasonWazza]

Here is the way i imagine D2 starting as a whole with what i am saying just FYI.

Every player claims their night target.
Once this has completed, every player can also claim whether the night targets make sense to them (Allows for Tracker/Inspector/Loyal Checker to give their info, while protected by pretenders/People claiming Roleblocked with no visits on them.)

Examples as follows;

X is a doctor, they attempted to protect Y
Y was killed at night, no one claims to visit X at night, therefore X claims that they believe there is False information. if someone claims to have visited X, then they claim that they believe they have true information.
Y wasn't killed at night, X will claim that they believe there is true information.

X is a Tracker, They visited Y and got that they visited Z
Y claims to have visited X at night, therefore X claims that they believe there is False information.
Y claims to have visited Z at night, therefore X claims that they believe there is True information.

X is a Loyal Checker, they checked Y at night
For a failure, If no one visited X at night, they claim False information, If someone visited X at night, they claim they have true information.
For a completion of the action, if someone visited X at night, they claim False information, If someone didn't visit X at night, the claim True information.

X is an Inspector, they checked Y at night.
For a positive, if no one claims to have visited Y at night, they claim False information, if someone claims to visit Y at night, they claim True information
For a negative, if no one claims to have visited Y at night, they claim True information, if someone claims to visit Y at night, they claim False information.

The rest can claim randomly.

Note that the above allows truthful claims from Tracker/Loyal Checker/Inspector that the scum can't cleanly identify before a flip, and post a flip, town can have truthful information as to who the PR has visited, and their result.

The random and Pretender claims also cleanly hide each of these PR's fairly well.

Note: i don't think this really breaks the setup all that much, it just hinders scum from lying in their claims.

[JasonWazza]

UNVOTE: DeltaBreedy
VOTE: Bingle

Honestly seems like a fairly scummy way to claim that if i'm being honest.

[JasonWazza]

Kowah, you realize there is no alignment tied to roles right?

And that seeking neighbors can be a S/T pairing?

[JasonWazza]

I mean I think we should just policy lim Bingle, because Seeking neighbor's shouldn't be top priority on anything, over getting useful information out of our information roles, and having them to be able to claim that information (which is now impossible, if we keep bingle alive, as claiming targets no longer works.)

Seeking neighbor's should have basically been treated as named Roles.

[JasonWazza]

I mean I think we should just policy lim Bingle, because Seeking neighbor's shouldn't be top priority on anything, over getting useful information out of our information roles, and having them to be able to claim that information (which is now impossible, if we keep bingle alive, as claiming targets no longer works.)

Seeking neighbor's should have basically been treated as named Roles.

Does having them out really damage the plan that much though? If I'm reading your suggestion correctly a seeking neighbour would have one of the ones to claim randomly anyway, so I think the other roles are still protected by your idea.

Well any seeking neighbor, Pretender or otherwise targets Bingle, as you noted, a kill would make sense to go towards Bingle, so a Doctor probably needs to go there as well, and the way it was claimed means it could just be scum trying to justify targeting the kill by saying "i am targeting randomly" so Roleblock and Tracker could also make sense heading to Bingle.

All it really does is put all our information into a really shitty basket that says Neighborhood along the side.

[JasonWazza]

how would the target check make sense to them? are we just doing this to know who has true information?

The truth of information isn't the main aim (it's a helpful aim, but not the main aim, it just mostly gets solved throughout this information)

The main aim is to get information claimed, note that Loyal Checker and Inspector both claim all their information, we can check the truth of this in other ways, so the main aim is to just get their information claimed.

The Tracker doesn't claim all their information, just their target, and if their target is telling the truth about where they visited

For D2, we just want this information claimed in case they get flipped overnight, on D3 however, we are at the point, where we probably have enough information to.
a) tell if the Scum team has been telling the truth about their visits. (enough roles give information about this that we probably have this pinned down)
b) have a conclusive list as to who the pretender's are. (it's hard for a pretender themselves to work this out, but with everyone else's information present, it becomes a lot easier)
c) turn our Loyal Checker into a Pseudo-Cop (because we know where the Roleblocker has been, so their information is that of a cop)
d) force scum into a claim of results and locations early.

[JasonWazza]

If it helps, just consider Truth a scenario A, and False a scenario B (i started with Tracker in my mind, hence True/False, then quickly realized that Inspector and Loyal Checker can be really strong in this setup as well if we can use their info).

The main aim is just to get the truth out, in a way that scum can't parse, but as soon as a flip occurs it's immediately there for everyone to see.

[JasonWazza]

I mean I think we should just policy lim Bingle, because Seeking neighbor's shouldn't be top priority on anything, over getting useful information out of our information roles, and having them to be able to claim that information (which is now impossible, if we keep bingle alive, as claiming targets no longer works.)

Seeking neighbor's should have basically been treated as named Roles.

Any particular reason you’re framing this push both as a scummy claim and a policy lim?

Why is it you think both can't be true?

This seems to be a thing that i've come back to that you can't think it's both a worthwhile policy lim, and also scummy, can it be explained to me how exactly this makes sense?

[JasonWazza]

Why is it you think both can't be true?

This seems to be a thing that i've come back to that you can't think it's both a worthwhile policy lim, and also scummy, can it be explained to me how exactly this makes sense?

So, to clarify:

There are several different options here:

You think I am an idiot, and therefore a detriment to town regardless of my alignment -> Policy lim.
You think I am intentionally trying to push a bad strategy in order to cripple town's ability to solve -> Claiming is scummy.
You don't actually think either of those things and are just conveniently putting a vote on someone -> You are scummy.

I'm trying to narrow down which one is the case, which I believe to be option 2.

I think the claim is bad for town overall due to the fallout of targeting -> Policy Lim.
I think the claim is scummy because of the wording within it -> Voting for you.

In fact i'll take the claim apart to show why.

I'm a seeking neighbor. No other seeking neighbor should claim, but if you're a seeking neighbor, you can target me. If I get no neighborhood, I will be taking this as confirmation that I'm a faker.

I will be randomly targeting a player who is not me. This is the extent of the mechanical discussion we need D1.

So first line, the second half of this line is unnecessary, and seems to be deliberately setting up for a fail, the reason this can be bad, is i can see a Mafia X claiming seeking neighbor, we have no way of confirming that you aren't that, so this becomes a huge issue.

In fact to add to why this is dumb, we don't actually get confirmation of you not being fake just because a neighborhood doesn't spawn, it's either your fake, or the other seeking neighbor was roleblocked.

Second line is also an issue, your already getting the seeking neighbor to target you, why do you need to target a random player, this seems like setting up a scum kill, with a simple "well i said i'd target randomly" when in this case you should be targeting no one, if you are actually town, hence why i think you should be absolutely roleblocked.

[JasonWazza]

Merlyn is probably town for the meta read. Also the meta read is shit.

The meta read was just cancelling out the "your calling for a no lim, that is scummy" so how exactly is it shit?

[JasonWazza]

Kowah hasn't done much D1 here to go off, personality seems the same, i don't think he has done anything read worthy at this point though.

Though that's also coming from someone that uses Meta mostly as a rule out of reads rather then a generator of reads.

[JasonWazza]

Kowah hasn't done much D1 here to go off, personality seems the same, i don't think he has done anything read worthy at this point though.

Though that's also coming from someone that uses Meta mostly as a rule out of reads rather then a generator of reads.

Do you agree that the games are only very superficially similar?

I mean i agree and i don't, i think for the purpose it was pulled up it's useful enough,

and i think the difference you seem to be attributing might just be a Newbie having had a few more games on site and learning as they go

just looked and this line doesn't make sense since they had a few games on the site before then, but it still maybe feels like a Newbie learning that voicing that so adamantly might not be worth it, i dunno, definitely feels like he is calling it out differently as an option either way.

[JasonWazza]

This concern over targeting fallout is very interesting to me. What do you expect a theoretical mafia seeking neighbor loses in the world of track guilties by outing their target the day after? “You targeted X, who was killed. Why?” Would still have the very obvious conclusion of “I thought they were town and I wanted to neighborize them.”

The concern for targeting fallout is that i believe this type of game actually actively benefits from our targeting not all falling on the same player, to have the inspector have a bit more value, the issue simply being that you claiming this can motivate people other then the Seeking neighbor to target you, and this actually calls out roles very quickly based on if they target you (or maybe that's just me overthinking things, in that i think certain roles should be targeting you and other's shouldn't).

As far as whether I should be specifically tracked or roleblocked… you have put a lot more effort into targeting the tracker and roleblocker here than I have. I’m an objectively safe roleblock target, because roleblocking won’t actually stop anything. I’m an objectively bad scum track target, because explicitly I will be visiting and the stand to gain no information from doing so. But absolutely nothing about my claim makes me a better doctor or tracker or inspector or whatever target than anyone else, and the motivation you claim to see here just doesn’t exist.

Inspector yeah definitely not, Tracker would make sense if they think a Roleblocker is unlikely to target you, Doctor can be worth it if they think you are town, and scum are potentially going to kill you to stop info (hint: Mafia might have a Seeking neighbor, and changing them to just a killer instead is beneficial.)

There is a scum reason to claim seeking neighbor, and that is to falsely confirm yourself as a pretender, but every mechanical issue you seem to have with my play is pretty much nonsense.

The main mechanical issue i have, is your role is inherently useless, and claiming to try and out yourself as a pretender is unnecessary.

Not to mention this can delay actual Seeking neighbor's from actually getting linked, to prove themselves real (which again for the most part is just useless but eh).

[JasonWazza]

I think overall this game has a strange preoccupation with the what over the why, when generally I think scumhunting should emphasize the exact opposite.

I mean no one is talking for the most part.

Appearance has done fuck all, Donempire posted saying they wouldn't read something, then voted for you, for seemingly no reason, Invis parked a vote on Delta and then did nothing, Poltical clout has tailed the vote on Delta for no real reason.

Like just to be clear, these votes on Delta are bad, this is just Delta being Delta, and honestly i think it's town Delta myself.

Kowah is probably also town, Bingle still feels scummy but seems like it might just be mech clash, and Merlyn i'm still unclear on.

UNVOTE: Bingle
VOTE: Invisibility

You should know Delta already better then this, so why exactly is Delta the person you are jumping on?

[JasonWazza]

like describe what you see here specifically in Delta town cuz it is not as obvious as you think it is

Town Delta is way more confrontational then Scum Delta, could be playing to meta, but i think it's good enough for this early.

though 105 feels a bit wonky even then, though Delta has a habit of arguing semantics a lot.

[JasonWazza]

@jason how is 105 wonky? it means i looked it up unstead,shaky, awry, or wrong. are you using wonky differently?

No that is how i was using it, feels like a weird semantic argument to make and i feel like NAI and not Scum indicative are basically interchangeable depending on context (EG. saying something that is scummy is NAI and Not scum indicative, are the same thing).

[JasonWazza]

This, especially when paired with the acknowledgment that seeking neighbor on its own isn't a role that should draw night actions other than seeking neighbor to it.

Yes it's not a role that should NATUARLLY draw actions to it, a claimed role is a different beast entirely (and how you claimed was ew, so more so), especially when the potential exists to ruin information gained.

Well any seeking neighbor, Pretender or otherwise targets Bingle, as you noted, a kill would make sense to go towards Bingle, so a Doctor probably needs to go there as well, and the way it was claimed means it could just be scum trying to justify targeting the kill by saying "i am targeting randomly" so Roleblock and Tracker could also make sense heading to Bingle.

The concern for targeting fallout is that i believe this type of game actually actively benefits from our targeting not all falling on the same player, to have the inspector have a bit more value, the issue simply being that you claiming this can motivate people other then the Seeking neighbor to target you, and this actually calls out roles very quickly based on if they target you (or maybe that's just me overthinking things, in that i think certain roles should be targeting you and other's shouldn't).

This, especially when paired with the acknowledgment that seeking neighbor on its own isn't a role that should draw night actions other than seeking neighbor to it.

Guess i didn't type this, but these are all POTENTIAL thoughts for each of the roles, that each make sense in their own right, hence why i think the claim is bad.

I don't expect every role to visit you tonight, that is dumb.

[JasonWazza]

I agree that Delta feels town so far but Jason seems to have way more conviction here which doesn't really make sense to me.

Are you really scum reading me for having conviction that this is Delta Town?

And when Delta is your third town read to boot?

What the fuck?

I've been back and forth as to whether or not Jason is town for their vote on me cuz like it kind of gave me genuine vibes vs it suggesting being informed like Black said. Ok now that I'm putting this into words I can barely justify the former so the latter is much more likely. 110 makes Jason's conviction even weirder

So 1 post that feels a bit off should instantly ruin a town read I have?

Like as a note, i didn't say i thought the post was scummy, I said wonky because I'm not entirely sure if it's even a scummy post or not.

this post feels scummy to me. There's an informed air about it.

And just to clarify, can i ask what exactly is informed about me calling out that a decent chunk of players aren't posting worth shit, and that i have town reads on Delta/Kowah, and Bingle feels like a mech clash so i need to stop tunneling.

Like what exactly is informed about any of that?

UNVOTE: Invisibility

[JasonWazza]

So 1 post that feels a bit off should instantly ruin a town read I have?

that's not what I meant. A post that gives you pause should make you think that Delta isn't obviously townie enough that someone voting him is scummy

You realize 105 happened after i called the votes on Delta bad (and an aside, BAD NOT SCUMMY)

[JasonWazza]

I mean I voted you for content for the most part.

[JasonWazza]

Interesting, out of all these the kowah read is the one i'm in the most opposition of. The guy just seemed to create confusion with his no-lim strategy, then just discard it without elaborating further. I don't see the point of this at all.

I'm confused, what part of trying to push no-lim's is going for confusion?

Like this is a point that is done to death so much that it's not like there will be confusion about a no-lim strat, so what exactly makes you think that this is purely a push to try and make town confused over an actual personal belief that No-Lim is good?

VOTE: Donempire

[JasonWazza]

agreed.
though, bingle has claimed a weak pr and other seeking neighbor can always target him.

I understand that. I still think the RB should only block Bingle if they think he is scum though

Why does Town!Bingle need to not be RB'd in your mind?

I think putting our RB in a useful spot for all of town isn't a bad idea, If Bingle is Town, we give all our PR's a night to use their power, If Bingle is Scum, we openly force the other scum member to also not use their role to get a kill off.

[JasonWazza]

Maybe it's a playstyle thing but I'm never this sure about someone based on meta alone.

My read is just based on Meta?

Fucking news to me.

Don't let Delta being third on my list confuse you about where I stand. I think he could definitely be scum still.

And why do you think i don't think Delta could be scum still? it's not even Page 9, i'm not 100% certain no matter how much conviction i push.

You don't seem to think so and I read that type of conviction as informed, especially this early in a game

Just to be clear, I would be scum in every game I play then, because if you don't have conviction, your votes don't actually have weight to them. and your pushes are useless.

Can you explain your Kowah townread?

No-lim stuff is a Personality read, For the most part the rest is gut, to try and explain, Kowah is still pushing stuff normally, even while rebutting the no-lim stuff, there is still the push to solve within their posting.

[JasonWazza]

Like just to be clear, knowing someone's personality and taking it out of your thinking isn't a Meta read, it's just not being stupid and ignoring how that person plays.

[JasonWazza]

I don't think the RB'er should ever block someone they think is town. Do you?

I think the RB should consider the net benefit to town on their roleblock, and reality is, net benefit of blocking not!Bingle is negative.

Sure they might be right about their read, does that mean your actually roleblocking the kill? Probably not
And they could just be reading the game bad, which means you could be blocking our tracker, or our Psuedo-Cop, (as an example) is that helpful? No

[JasonWazza]

Like just to be clear, knowing someone's personality and taking it out of your thinking isn't a Meta read, it's just not being stupid and ignoring how that person plays.

Uhh I'm not sure what I'm missing here but how a person plays as either alignment is exactly what a meta read is

What i'm saying is ignoring the parts that are Meta, and using the rest to make your read isn't a Meta read.

[JasonWazza]

Example: Kowah talks about no-lim and can defend his thinking on it well regardless of alignment, take that and throw it in the trash and keep going with what is left over, this isn't a Meta read, it's just ignoring the Meta stuff.

[JasonWazza]

You townread Kowah because his personality feels the same as his last game

I'm sorry what the fuck?

Just to be clear, if your referring to this we have a clash on wording

No-lim stuff is a Personality read

In this case, it's a personality read, so it goes in the garbage.

Personality read = this is just their personality and useless as a metric for anything

[JasonWazza]

Kowah hasn't done much D1 here to go off, personality seems the same,

i don't think he has done anything read worthy at this point though

.

[JasonWazza]

and 110 isn't my full thoughts on Delta, I tend to keep full thoughts to myself early game because there is no point giving all my thoughts away, It's just a bit of Meta that I thought might help the game progress somewhere useful, that I had in the tank from previously looking into Delta.

[JasonWazza]

Are you always this defensive when someone scumreads you?

And as a note, no i tend to ignore scum reads on me unless the reasoning for them is bad.

And frankly this one is bad considering the sorts of things your posting (like somehow getting a Town Read for Kowah in a post where i said i literally have no read on Kowah)

Your reasoning for voting me is Conviction, and that is just an objectively bad reason to scum read someone (like in what world would that ever not be a Personality tell?).

And the sort of posts you pull up, that Kowah one is before i town read Kowah, and i don't see why you would assume that 110 is the only reason i have to read Delta as town (which as a point, sounds like someone that does actually have TMI).

Which also, those posts don't even really have conviction in them, you literally used posts where I'm either not having a read (no conviction) or where I'm even calling out something else Delta did (how is this conviction?)

[JasonWazza]

Just to clarify then, you still have me as a top scum read, even without the conviction stuff?

[JasonWazza]

You are ignoring so much with that hypothetical, just to be clear.

Here is the simple fact, I would prefer a roleblocker be on Bingle and be confirmed to not hit our Tracker/Loyal Checker/Inspector, then to have free reign to potentially fuck everything up, for the simple reason of "they might stop the kill in a dream scenario"

Because instead of just relying on the information roles we have to potentially stockpile useful info, we are relying on a Roleblocker, not only being right on their scum reads, but also then being right on who will make the kill, which is more beneficial?

And note, sure yes these roles might be in the hands of scum, that actually doesn't matter as much as you think, because if they get revealed to be real, and have lied, then they are scum.

[JasonWazza]

I actually personally think the Roleblocker is anti-town in this setup by default (at least early game), so I don't see directing them as bad at all.

[JasonWazza]

What cogdis?

I don't want a Roleblocker stopping our information gathering roles, for the small chance they might stop the kill, and being on you is a good way to do that, while also if your scum FORCING your scum-partner to make the kill.

[JasonWazza]

My claim is bad because it influences targeting, to the point that it justifies a policy lim. Also, we should be pseudoleashing a roleblocker to my claim, because it actively mitigates the dangers of a roleblocker. Also also, it is proscum to have individual roles be recognizable based on whether they claim to have targeted me in pseudoclaim, completely ignoring that a pseudoclaim by it's very nature groups people into "roles that target townreads" and "roles that target scumreads".

Regardless, the point of a town roleblocker D1 is the threat of a roleblock. Say, for instance, that you scumtrack me. You receive a no result. You don't know whether you are a pretender or have been roleblocked, so whether or not you can safely fakeclaim is in question. Say instead that you get a result of I targeted Kowah. You don't know if you are a pretender or I actually targeted Kowah. Say I targeted no one. You don't know if I holstered, was rb'd or you are a pretender. The threat that maybe a roleblocker might have interfered with information means that scum can't lie about their N1 action easily, which then makes their claim vastly more interesting, because the only viable fakeclaim is to be a pretender and pretenders don't actually take actions.

Just to be clear, this isn't Cognitive Dissonance.

This is you fucked us by claiming the way you did, we have to play around the fact that you have done this now.

That's not Cognitive Dissonance, that's fucking dealing with Reality.

[JasonWazza]

Also another News Flash for Bingle, outing the Pretenders early, isn't actually good for town.