In post 346, Prism wrote:For Gamma it's a thing because we interrogated Gamma about it. It's a bad point but it's not like he's going door to door begging us to buy it.
For ulyana, she believed my train of thought (thinking/joking about trials and acquittals) was less plausible and natural than Pooky's and suggestive that I was informed in some way.
worth noting that i interrogated shiki about her line of reasoning related to this as well
@pooky i think your plan doesn't work now that you've mentioned it
In post 346, Prism wrote:For Gamma it's a thing because we interrogated Gamma about it. It's a bad point but it's not like he's going door to door begging us to buy it.
For ulyana, she believed my train of thought (thinking/joking about trials and acquittals) was less plausible and natural than Pooky's and suggestive that I was informed in some way.
worth noting that i interrogated shiki about her line of reasoning related to this as well
@pooky i think your plan doesn't work now that you've mentioned it
minor details infinity
minor details
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:50 pm
by ulyana
In post 343, Prism wrote:Adding to this, while I have come to expect that there will be these random lines of yours that you think it is possible to assemble into a gorgeous track somehow and it will appear to me that they obviously never will regardless of configuration, I think you are very valuable as a person, and you definitionally have value as a player. I don't have any judgement on you qualitatively as a player and don't think it would matter even if I did.
I also have lines of thought that I think are beautiful and wind up being awfully invalid knots, and you have some that wind up in fact being quite beautiful.
because scumbags know if this thing is good or not.
if it's good, scumbags will want it.
if it's bad, scumbags won't want it.
So if we give it to someone who wants it, it's more likely we give it to a scumbag if it's good, and a non-scumbag if it's bad.
uh
if it's bad and the scumbags know it is bad and therefore do not in actuality want it but know that it is to be given to someone who does not want it would they not simply pretend to want it
or are you simply saying that the subset of {you, prism, taly} should not be given the throne
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:51 pm
by Prism
I thought this was the single best formulation of ulyana's point
In post 102, Prism wrote:My point was that Pooky's came after, and yes I was asleep. Some of your points this was irrelevant but there was one that had the order reversed.
yes i know it came after, but i do not understand how you decided that being chosen might be a good option without a similar thought to pooky's, like being ic'ed here seems super super unlikely to me
i think maybe i did not explain this very well,
and if you did have a similar thought to pooky's it is strange that you would not have shared it i guess
My counter is first that Pooky and I are not even remotely close to the same player and I didn't think of an IC, just a whether or not to execute vote, second being that the entire joke was "perhaps there is a prize!" is intentionally overly optimistic and that a standard elim was the most likely outcome.
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:52 pm
by PookyTheMagicalBear
I think if the throne is good and give king powers then scum team probly came into today with a plan of who to give the throne to and that person(scum) is actively campaigning for it.
if the throne is bad and kills the person who sits in it, there would be no scum campaigning for it.
In either scenario we shouldn't give the throne to someone who is campaigning for it.
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:52 pm
by PookyTheMagicalBear
so yea im just talking about Taly/Prism
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:53 pm
by PookyTheMagicalBear
I personally don't want to sit in the throne even tho I think its good cuz I am a giant wuss and I do not want to die cuz this mini game thing sounds super fun
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:56 pm
by Gamma Emerald
In post 340, Prism wrote:You missed the important question in that Gamma. I will bold it, highlight it in red, and double the font size for you.
In post 290, Gamma Emerald wrote:Prism’s desire to be acquitted was a little skeevy and his reaction to being sussed was to claim joke which while technically valid doesn’t negate what actual tangible game thoughts he displayed with his joke
I was the first player who brought attention to the fact it may not be a straightforward elim.
The specific way I did so was a joke and a reference to the term "trial".
What
is
are the "actual tangible game thoughts" you think are at issue here?
To respond to your recent point about "internalized guilt" for wanting a hypothetical trial around me to end in an acquittal anyway, I don't want an answer to this but food for thought: When someone undergoes a trial, what do you think the outcome of the result is for those who are innocent? A guilty verdict? Christ dude.
I don’t really stand by this anymore but like, you seemed to have some idea in your head that an acquittal would have lasting impact, at least that’s how my head filled in that blank.
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 2:59 pm
by PookyTheMagicalBear
I may have been influenced by watching Squid Games
because I am PUMPED
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:05 pm
by petapan
gamma, i still want clarification on what you meant by me being "reactive" and why that was suspicious, and why pooky having scumreads you agreed with meant your conclusion was that he was scum, rather than town who was thinking the same way you were
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:05 pm
by Toogeloo
Since we have no PRs in this setup, maybe we should put people up who are terrible at playing VTs and would rather be carried.
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:07 pm
by Cephrir
In post 354, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:I think if the throne is good and give king powers then scum team probly came into today with a plan of who to give the throne to and that person(scum) is actively campaigning for it.
if the throne is bad and kills the person who sits in it, there would be no scum campaigning for it.
In either scenario we shouldn't give the throne to someone who is campaigning for it.
My experience with that type of mechanic is that scum usually fail to really and take advantage of it
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:08 pm
by Gamma Emerald
In post 359, petapan wrote:gamma, i still want clarification on what you meant by me being "reactive" and why that was suspicious, and why pooky having scumreads you agreed with meant your conclusion was that he was scum, rather than town who was thinking the same way you were
No.
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:09 pm
by Cephrir
In post 360, Toogeloo wrote:Since we have no PRs in this setup, maybe we should put people up who are terrible at playing VTs and would rather be carried.
Is there a meaningful difference between this suggestion and just saying we should elim limbait
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:09 pm
by petapan
VOTE: gamma
suit yourself
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:10 pm
by Prism
I'm down.
VOTE: Gamma
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:14 pm
by PookyTheMagicalBear
Spoiler: You don't have to read this if you don't want to read SetupSpec
In post 2, Morning Tweet wrote:The Main Events
This game has no daytime or nighttime! Instead, we will play through event phases. There will be at least five, but no more than ten events played!
Events are like mini-games and typically involve all living players making a big decision or many small ones! If the game doesn't involve all living players, the deadlines will be made as short as possible as to mimick a typical night-phase.
I want to talk about some of the setup spec I've done cuz I'm like super pumped about this game.
Let's take a look at the "Events"
Now I'm assuming events have to advance the game state because otherwise this game would not go anywhere so minimum we probably get 1 elimination per event - possibly more.
The numbers 5 and 10 are also very relevant. I assume Tweetie has already mapped out the 10 events, as in the last event must end the game if it has not ended by then.
Why is 5 relevant? Well we have 4 scum, if we eliminate 1 scum per event - then we could be done with the game in 4 events no?
Now since Tweetie has said there must be five events played - I think it makes sense that the sabotage can alter the event in such a way that the event will result in a town death instead of a scum death - otherwise we should be able to force a win inside 4 events rather than needing five.
Hence why I said I think the sabotage for the first event would be to change the Throne Activation from King Powers to a normal Electric Chair of sorts - it would make sense to me because it would be totally mindfucky.
Like imagine if we put the towniest townie in the chair and it killed them, wouldn't you think the people who put the townie in that chair might be baddies?
Also imagine if we used the chair like an execution device, we throw some universal scumread in the chair and they become king, the people who scumread mr baddie suddenly look bad.
Total mind fuck I know.
Which is why Prism's question to Tweet is a good one, about
WHEN
the scum have to decide on the sabotage, can they wait until the town makes a decision or would it have to be done prior to the event?
I believe due to the fact we must play at least 5 events, scum have increased agency and are able to make meaningful diversionary changes even after the town decision, because otherwise they would not be able to gurantee reaching the 5th event.
Due to the game having a limit of 10 events, I assume some events will have to involve mass casualties - as in multiple deaths if we are going to get to forced Elo at 10
Working backwards, assuming tweet has set things up so at Event 10 we must have 3 players (forced Elo), that works out to 13 deaths between events (1-9. For the sake of symmetry I am going to guess that the events are staggered as 1/2/1/2/1/2/1/2/1 deaths because it would look pretty.
Also I just wanted to say if there's a dance mini game I want to dance with Saber.