EPTIt also relies on decon and sentinel knowing propositional logic! :D
PTP IV - Demon's Run - Page 178
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Acrofales
Spain17709 Posts
It also relies on decon and sentinel knowing propositional logic! :D | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17709 Posts
| ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17709 Posts
Y is scum then 1+1=3 (only true if Y isn't scum. no way of formatting this positively) Z is scum OR 1+1=3 (only true if Z is scum) W is scum iff 1+1=2 (only true if W is scum) You can use this on 4 different people, or you can use it as follows: X is scum and 1+1=2 (only true if X is scum) nobody is scum then 1+1=2 (always true, ggnore) X is scum OR 1+1=3 (only true if X is scum) Y is scum iff 1+1=2 (only true if Y is scum) 100% reliable 2man DT check: if all 4 are true, then both X and Y are scum. If 3 are true, then X is scum and Y is town, if 2 are true, then Y is scum and X is town and if only 1 is true they're both town. I think that's the best you can get. | ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
| ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On July 03 2013 10:57 Acrofales wrote: X is scum and 1+1=2 (only true if X is scum) Y is scum then 1+1=3 (only true if Y isn't scum. no way of formatting this positively) Z is scum OR 1+1=3 (only true if Z is scum) W is scum iff 1+1=2 (only true if W is scum) You can use this on 4 different people, or you can use it as follows: X is scum and 1+1=2 (only true if X is scum) nobody is scum then 1+1=2 (always true, ggnore) X is scum OR 1+1=3 (only true if X is scum) Y is scum iff 1+1=2 (only true if Y is scum) 100% reliable 2man DT check: if all 4 are true, then both X and Y are scum. If 3 are true, then X is scum and Y is town, if 2 are true, then Y is scum and X is town and if only 1 is true they're both town. I think that's the best you can get. Ehmm... you are not supposed to use "1+1=2" or shit like that. Why? This is not programming, you don't do boolean stuff like 1+1==2. The propositions only have to deal with in-game info and in-game info only. If not I could just ask "X is scum and string theory is correct" and after they give me the answer be rich | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On July 03 2013 10:50 Crossfire99 wrote: Why didn't BC use Kna Naa? He could have prevented kita's kill. That's what I posted in-thread with big bold letters. Granted, I thought Xata would have made the kill, but either way that kill was 100% happening that day and could have been prevented (that, plus geript's MK were the main reasons I made that ability) | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On July 03 2013 11:06 Crossfire99 wrote: gonzaw, the reason why I messed up what items were what in your code was that you confused me because I thought my "day" abilities were actually abilities I could use during the day, not abilities I had to use during the night. I wasn't sure you knew this (that I couldn't use these abilities during the day) and didn't want to say it to reveal it to scum, so when I found item's E pm, it was the coin, but I just wrote medic lol. Yeah....I thought so as well >_> I forgot about using them at night lol The thing is that there was a hidden ending. You would have needed to use the Empty Gun on Event C, to gain a Gun (which is 1 KP). Then on Event E you would need to use the Gun, and you would get a Minigun. You could activate the Minigun at any time of the day phase, and it works like a 2-shot day vig. I.e you can activate it twice. I got confused with that one and the rest, that's why I put the "I'm an idiot" post and desperately told you to use I#E lol | ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17709 Posts
On July 03 2013 11:15 gonzaw wrote: Also Acro you aren't forced to make the 5 propositions EXACTLY in that order ("if-then", then "and", then "or", then "iff", etc). You can use any of them if you want. You could use 5 ANDS if you wanted, or whatever suits you So what is allowed as "other stuff"? As for string theory being true and getting rich: when Nature accepts deconduo's word as the gospel truth, maybe... but last time I checked the scientific method it is explicitly set up to avoid people (or books) stating unequivocally that something is true without any actual evidence  1+1=2 was simply a replacement for a proposition that is true. I'd be perfectly happy to replace that with "Acrofales was alive on day 1" or some equally trivially true statement about the game | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On July 03 2013 11:15 Crossfire99 wrote: gonzaw can I get a link to all the parts of the story? You put a ton of work in and I want to read it all. I asked decon to PM me back the stuff I have it in the "Sent" folder, but that doesn't let you quote the PM I sent, so I can't copy-paste it with the format  (spoiler/quote/bold/italic tags, etc) | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
That's layman terms for saying you can't have propositions that are derived by the rest. So if you have p1,p2,p3,p4 and p5, then: 1) p1,p2,p3,p4 |/- p5 or p1,p2,p3,p4 |/- ~p5 2) p1,p2,p3,p5 |/- p4 or p1,p2,p3,p5 |/- ~p4 3) p1,p2,p4,p5 |/- p3 or p1,p2,p4,p5 |/- ~p3 4) p1,p3,p4,p5 |/- p2 or p1,p3,p4,p5 |/- ~p2 5) p2,p3,p4,p5 |/- p1 or p2,p3,p4,p5 |/- ~p1 Imagine saying "nobody is scum", as p3. If you take the "hidden" set of propositions from regular mafia games and common sense, that is false So S |- ~p3. When I say "p1,p2,p3,p4 |/- p5" I really mean "S,p1,p2,p3,p4 |/- p5". In this case it's "S,p1,p2,p4,p5 |/- ~p3" therefore it's not valid. By saying stuff like "you can't use already known info/repeat info" it also means it works for sub-formulas of the original formulas you have. So if you have C="IF A THEN B", not only does C NOT have to be "already known", but neither can A nor B. Again, to avoid breaking it like you just did. I wanted it to be complex so they could do something like this: If geript is scum then kita is town (NOT kita is 3P neutral survivor) OR Dandel shot solstice on D1 austin is scum AND gonzaw is town BC shot MZ on D2 OR (NOT gonzaw RBed BC on D1) If (BC is town AND austin doesn't hide any info about his role) THEN (geript is scum OR kita is bulletproof) And depending on answer you would have to recreate the semantic tree and see what you can do with it! That's fun! There's no fun in saying "gonzaw is town AND 1+1=2", if you want to do that then just say "gonzaw is town AND TRUE" it's the same thing. Also no, "already known info" isn't allowed, so saying "Acro was alive on D1" is already known info, or is a true proposition that belongs in S Since you PM it to the host yourself, you cant use info YOU know (but other people don't) either. So BC could have put "geript is scum AND the 5th letter of my role PM Is 't' ". Not only does it give YOU more "easy" info (you just convert a complex formula into the simple easy to process one "geript is scum"), but it may give other players more info if you tell the thread about it. I'm not so sure about the 2nd issue there, but if you made a complex enough set of formulas, if you get a specific answer maybe others could determine if one of those propositions was true or false, because that would be the only way you would know the whole answer. But....you could just replace the "true" proposition (only you know of) with anything else and just give town a different answer. Still it's still cheating so not allowed | ||
|
geript
10024 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
You could do this if you want: "austin is scum AND (gonzaw is town OR (NOT gonzaw is town))" You get the same equivalent formula "austin is scum", no need to say "Acro was alive in D1" or stuff like that. That's why the same method has to apply to sub-formulas as well | ||
|
geript
10024 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
"But a DT listcheck is OP and boring!" I thought. Then I thought "what other ability is awesome as fuck?". Then I remembered possibly one of my favourite abilities: Phoenix Wright So I thought "Wouldn't it be cool if I could make a LISTCHECK OF PHOENIX WRIGHTS???? OMG!!" and so the Binge was born | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6782 Posts
On July 03 2013 12:10 geript wrote: The funny thing about this, despite I'm sure no one believing me, is that the D1 lynch story is 100% true. I find this to be the most ironic thing of the game. The event that exposed the scum team was entirely innocent and accidental. Geript really wasn't around and I actually did go watch indycar haha | ||
| ||
