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

[Merlyn]

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.

I'm super duper confused about this, can you explain more? What stops you from being the obvious NK and then we don't get the info back?

[Merlyn]

pagetop lets go

[Merlyn]

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.

[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.

[Political Clout]

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'm a bit stupid so bear with me. d2 begins we all claim who we targeted right? how do we do the second part? how would the target check make sense to them? are we just doing this to know who has true information? your examples make sense to me. like in your first example lets say i'm the doctor and I visit you jason but you jason die that means I have false information, but if you don't die then that means I have true information? am I following this correctly? or am I a clown?

[Invisibility]

I think I kind of get it

[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.

[Appearance]

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.

doesn't checker just see if their action succeeded?
so, loyal checker would only know if a) target is unaligned with them, b) they were blocked

[Appearance]

ah.
read up now.
i see what u mean now

[Bingle]

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.

I'm super duper confused about this, can you explain more? What stops you from being the obvious NK and then we don't get the info back?

Absolutely nothing stops me from being the nk, but that’s okay. Unconfirmed neighbor is a meh role and if I get shot I get shot. The entire utility behind having exactly one seeking neighbor claim is this:

We might get confirmed pretenders.

[Bingle]

For clarification, a seeking neighbor who gets a pt with deadme knows they’re alive. A tracker targeting me who goes to the nk has exactly the same implication of me being the killer as they would if I were to not claim. I doubt a doctor should target me, as a neighbor is not a very powerful role and so an unlikely nk target outside of dayplay. An inspector should target me if they believe me to be otherwise scummy, just like an inspector should do with anyone else.


Basically, I have only really influenced the targeting of people with the seeking neighbor role, because for every other pr my claim is entirely irrelevant.

Also, the pseudo claim conversation doesn’t need to happen until D2 at the earliest and has the significant drawback of potentially allowing scum to narrow down the more probably troublesome town prs.

[Deltabreedy]

Do you not think you've narrowed down that pool yourself by claiming on page one?

[Bingle]

Sure. The trade off of having potential sn pretenders know that they are pretenders early is worth exactly one sn claim in my eyes. I would have advocated exactly one sn claim if I had drawn a different role. That’s because the pretender is the role with the highest potential to be useful to specifically town, regardless of whether town or scum rands it. We should lim outside of pretenders if at all possible until the first scum lim because at least one pretender is town.

JW is correct in that if we lim town d1 we should probably do a target and incriminating/clearing/nr claim d2, but if we lim scum a full massclaim is probably better and if we flip tracker the pseudo claim is worth substantially less, which means that the way we pseudo claim (if we do) is a conversation best had, say it with me now, on D2.

[Invisibility]

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

[Kowahbunga]

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.

[Deltabreedy]

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.

UNVOTE: Jason
VOTE: Kowahbunga

[Merlyn]

I don't find it scummy for Kowah to suggest this, because I've played with them before when he was town and he did the exact same thing. I'm not saying he's right (I have no idea if he's right bc I've never seen anyone do it yet), but it's not scum indicative of them.

[Bingle]

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

God no. If this was an AITP style game where discussion = bad I wouldn’t be in it.

It’s just a normal game of mafia where claims matter about half as much for the rest of D1.

VOTE: delta

[Deltabreedy]

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

[Invisibility]

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

[Merlyn]

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

...No?

Also, to clarify, defending what, Kowah's no lim strat?

[Appearance]

i'm going to agree with merlyn on kowah.
from memory, they tend to have scummy plans even as town.
so at best, it's nai.

[Appearance]

that being said i don't agree with kowah's plan either.

[Appearance]

and if i was invest, kowah totally would be a good target to check