Spoiler: Setup Spec is Bad
In post 6359, petapan wrote:UNVOTE: LLD
lol forward timeline is prob screwed
not sure i have an unvote i want other than this
glad gamma died because thinking rolestopper/bg was an extremely unlikely pair was going to dominate my thinking but i guess now we can stop doin bad setup spec arguments
In post 6364, petapan wrote:i wouldn't jump to conclusions - both those roles only functioned in the inverted timestream. at least don't kill him off setup specIn post 5232, Dunnstral wrote:This is a protective role, as is Gamma who also flipped. I don't believe Bell's claim.In post 6353, SirCakez wrote:Pisskop was eliminated day 6!
He was aForwards Tenet Operative/Inverted Rolestopper!
Night 5 will end shortly.
In post 6398, petapan wrote:personally i think setting her loose on annie would be funny, and at this point i'm just playing for entertainment
In post 6433, petapan wrote:no but ftr i would have done it anyway because lol setup specIn post 5331, Bell wrote:I'm still going to iso people including Annie,
did Pissko claim before they were killed?
In post 6446, petapan wrote:you're not gonna get me killed on bad setup spec
In post 6464, petapan wrote:pisskop didn't start on this side
but even my idiot brain understands typical setup design is going to avoid having multiple protectives that could potentially loop with each other to become unkillable
that's basic stuff so clearly it doesn't apply here
but clearly this is out the window
and i think it's because a significant chunk of town power is gated in a timestream where it doesn't work and might not get turnstiled, might get turnstiled late, or might just die upon getting turnstiled
so any assumptions about balance are likely to be significantly faulty
but hey sure is a good avenue for scum to go "this seems like too much town power" (but somehow sb9 is excluded from that equation)
In post 6466, petapan wrote:oh my brain doesn't work i guess the rolestop doesn't save the bg protect
what the fuck ever i don't care not voting off setup spec
In post 6503, petapan wrote:in that game the town kind of ripped its own face off so we didn't have to do much and the best thing was to sit back and let it happen. the cumulative number of times any member of the scumteam was voted that game was 2.In post 6495, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:did a quick skim through of this game that just ended:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=85074
Peta/Mwb/Ico scum team stomped the town and their play looks nothing like what's going on in this game
Though it could be that Peta and Mwb just had like 0 respect for the town in the game so they both decided to straight up open wolf their way thru the entire game balls out.
but yes, midwaybear is very nervous as scum and it comes through in his posts, several times he expressed to me in the PT he didn't know what to say, and here he just does not have the feeling of nervousness in his posting at all.
one of the things wediddo in that game (well, mainly iconeum i think) was abuse setup spec to get the town to axe its own PRs (including our dear moderator) by stepping in and going "gee i dunno guys do you really think the setup would have two investigatives, this seems too strong" and get people to ignore logic of how, say, a certain player would never claim the way they did as scum and was towntelling very hard, and instead go "but balance!" when it turns out most people just don't have a good idea of how setups are constructed
and so that's why people trying to come in and get someone voted purely off setup spec is so scummy to me
In post 6609, petapan wrote:like he saw what shelly claimed and assumed he was a cc, and tried to nudge toward that without outright ccing because this setup is a big troll
In post 6771, petapan wrote:i was shelly's receiver, cabd picked up on it yesterday at some point. annie's confusion about their role is exactly how i thought mine would work although i never got it confirmed obviously. i don't think they take that approach as scum
In post 6928, petapan wrote:i think the one in four logic is very arbitrary and dont care for itIn post 5895, Annie Edison wrote:Yeah, I suppose that’s fair about Spiffeh peta.
Assuming we use the one in four logic from our set id assume that set follows a similar rule and I expect there’s a fourth in the either side set as well
Spoiler: Contains Setup Spec
In post 6663, petapan wrote:fwiw - there are so many failure points on these gated investigatives that i absolutely believe there would be some redundancy built in to the setup
In post 6783, petapan wrote:having an investigative handing results to scum would be bastard and leave town severely handicapped from what we knowIn post 6778, Deacon Blues wrote:it seems self evident to me that not both members of the pair have to be townIn post 6775, petapan wrote:i was jokingly calling myself a mason b/c i'm the other half of the dead town follower
and in fact is likely there is at least one combo here that isn't all town
-b
In post 6915, petapan wrote:i spent the night looking at old cakez theme games and thinking we're fucked but it made me think about things
fire do you have a role that works in the other timestream or not
In post 6927, petapan wrote:pisskop's flip + whatever spiffeh is started in the forward side and only work in invertedIn post 5887, Annie Edison wrote:Both sides STARTED with a protective. There seems to be. Protective/blocker that can swap over to the other side- we have two claims on the table that fit this grouping from inverter.
thats 2 and 2 on both sides. hard for my mind to not see the parallels even though it seems super fucky but 2 PRs per thread that need to be inverted to start seems less weird than just 1? i feel as though that lessens the impact
In post 6926, petapan wrote:theres this kind of paralelism between all the claimed and known prs between all the threads, claimed protective starting in both threads, two roles that need to be stiled, the receiver pairs
im not saying they all have to be town because i don't know that and it'd be weird (plus all the pr claims are scummy) but things really do seem to mirror each other
and the intent with the turnstiles is obviously to create a logjam where not everyone can get to the other thread to do something useful and that weakens the expected effect of any potential power role
and most of the PRs basically outed themselves day 1 asking to be turnstiled, which is bizarre to me but id almost expect some multiplicity by design because of the whole logjam thing. i would think scum would theoretically have roles that only work on the other side too to give them some incentive to cross over but i dont know. it would still seem to be unconventional to me to ask to be turnstiled right away as scum just to block town and get locked into a pr claim but clearly not everyone thinks like me in that regard
but even saying that, if we split the two threads into pairs
two ivestigatives + a protective + two other gated PRs of some stripe
is not really outrageously far out of line with what seems to be standard balance for mini games in 2020? obv that is complicated by there being other roles and it'd be super dumb if scum just werent trying to get turnstiled but i cant stop thinking about how things seem to mirror
In post 7321, petapan wrote:i also have to wonder if you honestly think the setup would contain two amnesiac investigative pairs with half of each being scum making both effectively worthless and the majority of other PRs being timestream gated such that there is a strong possibility town has absolutely 0 useful night actions on night 1 aside from a bodyguard, maybe
because if you stop to think about it for a single second that's extremely implausible
