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

[Invisibility]

if it was a good plan it's probably too late now probably. We've talked too much

[Deltabreedy]

Isn't it a bit odd that you say it isn't indicative, rather than 'I don't think it's indicative'?

what does this mean

I find it weird that there's no hesitancy from Merlyn in calling it specifically 'Not Scum Indicative.

Like they very clearly say that 'It's not scum indicative of them', which isn't preceded by an 'I think or anything like that - it's a very definite statement backed up by absolutely nowt.

UNVOTE: Kowahbunga
VOTE: Merlyn

[Invisibility]

I have to disagree with that and I find it actually inherently scummy to be suggesting a no-lim with the intensity that you are. This is the only thing you're pushing and my gut reaction is that it stinks.

if someone earnestly believes in a no lim in this situation then they shouldn't push anyone so that they don't give scum information

I find it weird that there's no hesitancy from Merlyn in calling it specifically 'Not Scum Indicative.

Like they very clearly say that 'It's not scum indicative of them', which isn't preceded by an 'I think or anything like that - it's a very definite statement backed up by absolutely nowt.

I don't think whether or not she said "I think" matters a whole lot? She isn't proclaiming absolute grandstanding confidence. It's not like, a binary thing lol. Disagreeing with the meta read is fine, but getting uppity about this is weird!

I don't like the reasoning for either of your votes

VOTE: Delta

[Bingle]

It's pretty odd to me that this plan is being attributed to kowah by a bunch of different people. Vizzy was the first one to bring it up.

so do we just no lim and try to cut the discussion?

I really feel like a no lim gets us to D2 with the most pieces of information. A lim maybe hits scum, but if it doesn't then that's one less piece to the puzzle we have. I'm 101% for a no lim today.

Both of these show a fundamental misunderstanding of the setup, in that this is not a dethy scenario where putting the puzzle pieces into the right shape is autowin for town.

This is not AITP where scum is more heavily incentivized to do the solving than town is.

But regardless of whether or not that would be clear to everyone, it strikes me as super awkward that someone would call out the second post while completely ignoring the post immediately before it.

[Bingle]

*insert explicit question implied in the previous post*

Delta, what do you think about Vizzy's 39?

[Invisibility]

Vizzy was the first one to bring it up.

Kowah was in 21. Though yeah I do think it's valuable to question why Delta never brought what I said about no limming up. Also yeah you're right about no limming lolz. Plus it's not as fun

[Merlyn]

Isn't it a bit odd that you say it isn't indicative, rather than 'I don't think it's indicative'?

what does this mean

I find it weird that there's no hesitancy from Merlyn in calling it specifically 'Not Scum Indicative.

Like they very clearly say that 'It's not scum indicative of them', which isn't preceded by an 'I think or anything like that - it's a very definite statement backed up by absolutely nowt.

UNVOTE: Kowahbunga
VOTE: Merlyn

Delta, why did you answer Invis's question and not mine?

But my statement is backed up by something- Kowah doing this as town in our previous game together. You were actually there too, though you replaced out pretty early, but I think you were still around when Kowah started advocating a D1 no lim policy there too.

[Bingle]

Vizzy was the first one to bring it up.

Kowah was in 21. Though yeah I do think it's valuable to question why Delta never brought what I said about no limming up. Also yeah you're right about no limming lolz. Plus it's not as fun

Hm. I missed that. I’m still interested in delta’s thoughts.

[Bingle]

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?

[Bingle]

I've played with them before when he was town and he did the exact same thing.

Lynx?

[Merlyn]

Yup, here you go: viewtopic.php?p=13709502#p13709502

[GuyInFreezer]

VC 1.01

Merlyn (1):

Deltabreedy

Appearance (1):

Merlyn

Bingle (2)

Political Clout, JasonWazza

Invisibility (1):

Appearance

Deltabreedy (2):

Bingle, Invisibility

No Elimination:

Kowahbunga

Not Voting:

Donempire

With

9

alive,

5

votes to Eliminate

Deadline:

(expired on 2023-06-09 16:17:41)

[Donempire]

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.

I ain't reading all that

VOTE: Bingle

[Political Clout]

Isn't it a bit odd that you say it isn't indicative, rather than 'I don't think it's indicative'?

I find it pretty scummy and to be honest I find it pretty goofy that you're defending it based on what, meta?

Ninja'd by Bingle: Uh

UNVOTE:

I agree with this. rather than ignore I think there could be something there like if they do it as either alignment why not let others engage and ask what they are doing. I also agree with bingle I don't see why we can't implement jason's idea and also catch scum d1. sorry been absent another game currently holds my attention.

[Political Clout]

Isn't it a bit odd that you say it isn't indicative, rather than 'I don't think it's indicative'?

what does this mean

I find it weird that there's no hesitancy from Merlyn in calling it specifically 'Not Scum Indicative.

Like they very clearly say that 'It's not scum indicative of them', which isn't preceded by an 'I think or anything like that - it's a very definite statement backed up by absolutely nowt.

UNVOTE: Kowahbunga
VOTE: Merlyn

someone else calledit not scum indicative as well appearance are they scum in the same way?

I have to disagree with that and I find it actually inherently scummy to be suggesting a no-lim with the intensity that you are. This is the only thing you're pushing and my gut reaction is that it stinks.

if someone earnestly believes in a no lim in this situation then they shouldn't push anyone so that they don't give scum information

I find it weird that there's no hesitancy from Merlyn in calling it specifically 'Not Scum Indicative.

Like they very clearly say that 'It's not scum indicative of them', which isn't preceded by an 'I think or anything like that - it's a very definite statement backed up by absolutely nowt.

I don't think whether or not she said "I think" matters a whole lot? She isn't proclaiming absolute grandstanding confidence. It's not like, a binary thing lol. Disagreeing with the meta read is fine, but getting uppity about this is weird!

I don't like the reasoning for either of your votes

VOTE: Delta

VOTE: delta nvm I agree with invisibility now.

[Kowahbunga]

I feel a no lim is still our best option. Even with people disagreeing with me. Everyone has a power this game, even if you're a pretender, you're going to do something and get information. Which means everyone is going to be playing for their survival more than to solve today because everyone will be of the opinion they're important and need to see out the day so they can hopefully avoid the NK and get their ability off to save the day for town.

I do however think it's probably more advantageous than my usual "just end the day asap" to spend more time trying to solve the game and get a good feel for everyone so that everyone can target appropriately. We should not lim today.

[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?

[Donempire]

I'm missing something.

So mafia can get the seeking neighbour role, and if a town and mafia get the role then that would mean the role essentially becomes useless as now you're not proving to each other your role by being neighbours, yes? In that case, what does finding your neighbour, bingle, would prove except that you are not a pretender?

[Appearance]

I feel a no lim is still our best option. Even with people disagreeing with me. Everyone has a power this game, even if you're a pretender, you're going to do something and get information. Which means everyone is going to be playing for their survival more than to solve today because everyone will be of the opinion they're important and need to see out the day so they can hopefully avoid the NK and get their ability off to save the day for town.

I do however think it's probably more advantageous than my usual "just end the day asap" to spend more time trying to solve the game and get a good feel for everyone so that everyone can target appropriately. We should not lim today.

annoyingly u raise a good point that people may feel inclined to protect themselves over solving.
however, a flip can help us get some info and may help invest decide on who to check

[Bingle]

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

Because the definition of a policy lim is that it's explicitly not based on the likelihood of hitting scum, but on improving the quality/winnability of a game despite not being based on hitting scum?

[Bingle]

I'm missing something.

So mafia can get the seeking neighbour role, and if a town and mafia get the role then that would mean the role essentially becomes useless as now you're not proving to each other your role by being neighbours, yes? In that case, what does finding your neighbour, bingle, would prove except that you are not a pretender?

The utility in the role isn't in finding the neighbors, but in allowing pretenders who were told they were neighbors to find themselves.

Neighbor is basically a VT for this setup, but pretender is ~ 1/2 a named towny.

[Bingle]

protect themselves

This is inherently a mafia tell in the setup, more so than normal. A cop would have the motivation "I shouldn't get myself scumread and should fly under the radar". A maybe cop might not. There isn't a single claim in this setup that should necessitate backing down and letting it go D1.

[Bingle]

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.

[Bingle]

Oh, btw, I've recently taken a new position that will mean my posting will be inconsistent comparatively. I will likely be posting in blocks like this throughout the game, as I will frequently be unable to post while traveling or at work, although I will be able to post in blocks like this at least once a day.

[Donempire]

I'm missing something.

So mafia can get the seeking neighbour role, and if a town and mafia get the role then that would mean the role essentially becomes useless as now you're not proving to each other your role by being neighbours, yes? In that case, what does finding your neighbour, bingle, would prove except that you are not a pretender?

The utility in the role isn't in finding the neighbors, but in allowing pretenders who were told they were neighbors to find themselves.

Neighbor is basically a VT for this setup, but pretender is ~ 1/2 a named towny.

I see your point, thanks!

Pretenders are still twice as likely to be town than mafia though, since theres a limit of 1 pretender per mafia. In the case we can get solid confirmation - meaning without any doubt - that someone is a pretender, i believe they would be more important than just a vt, as a mafia pretender elim would confirm the pretender as town on the spot. With a doctor it also reduces the chance of a night kill.

Sorry for being too caught up in mech-talk, i'm trying to put everything in order before i can start fully.