|
hopeless can't be fakeclaiming, because then someone would have had to be around to roleblock BH - only BH can be fakeclaiming.
And as for your other point, I think that it's not necessarily a suicidal move if you (a) think you can get away with it, or (b) don't really think you can / want to try to win normally as SK in the first place
Basically, I still think BH's claim makes as much sense from an SK as it does from an actual town jailkeeper.
|
|
On November 19 2012 01:37 Blazinghand wrote: snb y u so mad didue u gotta chill out is that dota screencap fake or what
no its not fake
i have no idea what iamperfection was talking about, i've been assuming he has some kind of point and he'll get to it eventually
as for "y u so mad didue u gotta chill out" all i have to say is, I guess your plan to discredit me by insulting me and getting me angry is working.
|
and when you say "the xlarity post" I assume you mean your case on clarity
i'll take a look at it eventually, right now I want keirathi to get back to us on the one-shot-role question.
|
It depends on how Keirathi resolved one-shot roles.
If he just turned them into VTs, then BH would say that the setup is TTMVVDC or TTMVVDD, and that he's still "confirmed jailkeeper" but there were no other blues.
If Keirathi either (a) turned one-shot roles into full roles, or (b) re-rolled any setup that had one-shot roles in it, then yes I agree, a serial killer automatically loses at LYLO when there are no more blue roles.
|
I have high hopes that we'll get an answer from Keirathi, he told us the thing about the probabilities, plus the thing about C9++ is that you know what the possible setups are even though you don't know what the specific setup is, that's why it's "semi-open."
|
On November 19 2012 03:11 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2012 01:40 strongandbig wrote:On November 19 2012 01:37 Blazinghand wrote: snb y u so mad didue u gotta chill out is that dota screencap fake or what no its not fake i have no idea what iamperfection was talking about, i've been assuming he has some kind of point and he'll get to it eventually as for "y u so mad didue u gotta chill out" all i have to say is, I guess your plan to discredit me by insulting me and getting me angry is working. how did you snipe me thats all i want to know. i was f5'ing like crazy and somehow you sniped me with your lol. I thought you said you were playing dota.
meh idk,
I probably looked over and saw "oh it's 3am and my antimage died, I might as well check if there's a flip yet," then got lucky with when I happened to click "next page"
|
So if you rolled a CTTTTTT town, then would the scum/SK team correspond to CTTTTTT or TTTTTTT?
|
Okay last question, would TTTTTVV be changed to TTTTTTV?
|
Okay so this is actually really interesting - it's not what I expected, one-shot roles neither get "upgraded" nor "removed" which narrows down the possible TT setups by a lot.
Also - C's have to come in pairs, whereas you have to have an odd number of V's or B's.
One consequence: the only situation in which there are no additional blue roles is in TTTTTMV, if BH is the serial killer and there are no remaining scum.
These are all TT setups where BH and H1 are telling the truth
You'll note that there are no B setups here. That's because any possible TT setup including a vig, a JK, a miller, and a roleblocker, would have either a one-shot JK or a one-shot roleblocker, and thus be bumped up to three T's.
Now, let's look at the cases where BH is lying, but we're still in a TT setup.
- TTMMMVB
- TTMVVVB
- TTMVCCB
- TTMVBBB
Now, with this new information, I can actually start to get to grips with the single-T setups.
If BH is telling the truth we have
- TMMMVDB
- TMVVVDB
- TMVDCCB
- TMVDBBB
If BH is lying we have
- TMMMVVV
- TMMMVCC
- TMVVVCC
- TMVCCCC
Then finally there are the zero-T setups where BH is telling the truth:
- MMMDVVV
- MMMDVCC
- MDVVVCC
- MDVCCCC
Where BH is lying:
- MMMVVVB
- MMMVBBB
- MMMCCCC
- MVVVBBB
- MVBBBCC
- MVBCCCC
|
Okay sorry I said the last one would be my last question but that's a lie. In the mafiascum C9++, VVV gives a vigilante plus a one-shot vigilante. If your setup generator rolled VVV would that become two one-shot vigilantes or would the setup become VTT?
(I found your setup generator but I don't know how to read the source code)
|
the way that keirathi deals with one-shot roles or multi-shot vigilantes actually makes the (already unlikely) 0T or 1T setups even less likely. Like, those setups are extremely unlikely to happen.
|
actually keirathi there might be a problem with your setup generator
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9dEjk.png) TTTTT shouldn't have a roleblocker, it should just have goon+gf
Unless the scum roles you're using are different from the mafiascum/mafiawiki c9++ roles
|
okay listen up guys
I thought of this on the way back from work.
If we massclaim, it will instantly confirm half of the town.
The scum will have to either claim a blue role, or claim VT.
We look at the blue roles that get claimed, we back out the DCTVetc, and we calculate "for this set of blue roles, how many VTs should there be"
Then there will either be too many or too few VT claims. If there's too many, all the blues are confirmed. If there's too few, all the VTs are confirmed and one of the blues is scum.
sup now blazingasshole
|
|
man
why are you guys voting me again
like, just read the defense stuff i posted last time
|
##vote blazinghand maybe people will just follow me around for no reason
|
On November 19 2012 07:08 strongandbig wrote:Okay so this is actually really interesting - it's not what I expected, one-shot roles neither get "upgraded" nor "removed" which narrows down the possible TT setups by a lot. Also - C's have to come in pairs, whereas you have to have an odd number of V's or B's. One consequence: the only situation in which there are no additional blue roles is in TTTTTMV, if BH is the serial killer and there are no remaining scum. These are all TT setups where BH and H1 are telling the truthYou'll note that there are no B setups here. That's because any possible TT setup including a vig, a JK, a miller, and a roleblocker, would have either a one-shot JK or a one-shot roleblocker, and thus be bumped up to three T's. Now, let's look at the cases where BH is lying, but we're still in a TT setup.
- TTMMMVB
- TTMVVVB
- TTMVCCB
- TTMVBBB
Now, with this new information, I can actually start to get to grips with the single-T setups. If BH is telling the truth we have - TMMMVDB
- TMVVVDB
- TMVDCCB
- TMVDBBB
If BH is lying we have
- TMMMVVV
- TMMMVCC
- TMVVVCC
- TMVCCCC
Then finally there are the zero-T setups where BH is telling the truth: - MMMDVVV
- MMMDVCC
- MDVVVCC
- MDVCCCC
Where BH is lying: - MMMVVVB
- MMMVBBB
- MMMCCCC
- MVVVBBB
- MVBBBCC
- MVBCCCC
|
yeah if there are no other claims then you and bh are confirmed
bh is still terrible though
|
|
|
|
|