Micro 649: Normal Idea Mafia (Game Over)

[McMenno]

Why would Leon being jailkept cause Heart to get a no result?

Looks like I misunderstood jailkeeper. Still, my point stands.

[McMenno]

let's not delay this further

VOTE: Heartache

[Sgz13]

No

[Sgz13]

We need to at least discuss my ascetic theory and how likely it is.

[Sgz13]

1 shot confirm you got that nobody visited McMenno and not a no result please.

[McMenno]

for me to be ascetic both Heartache AND 1 Shot Vanilla Town need to be lying

[Sgz13]

You're right. Okay I believe you now.

You voting Heart because you think it's Heart-Leon or what? I couldn't follow your thought process there.

[Leonshade]

Heartache's investigation wouldn't have failed thanks to a jailkeep or a roleblock on me. The only way their NA failed was thanks to a rolestopper.

If CFJ was telling the truth about JKing Sgz13 N2, then the only one who could have blocked/stopped my investigation N2 would be 1-Shot's slot. But I find CFJ lying much more likely thank 1-Shot being scum. CFJ has no verification for anything he has claimed, whereas 1-Shot at least has Heartache's tracking result. Of course 1-Shot is also my strongest townread.

I think 1-Shot was the NK target N2, with Sgz13's doc protecting him. As for N3, I think it's likely that scum chose to not kill. If Heartache is town, scum would have to be wary of the tracking. Even with Heartache scum, it would be important for scum to focus on not getting caught during the massclaim and finding a good mislynch target. Easier with more people alive.

As it stands, I think 1-Shot is nearly conftown, and Sgz13 is probtown as well. If that's true, CFJ is 100% scum.

VOTE: callforjudgement

[Leonshade]

I forgot to mention, it's possible that CFJ (or someone else?) is a JOAT.

It seems odd that CFJ would rolestop Heartache N2, then rolestop me N3, without claiming either. Maybe he JK'd me N2 and rolestopped me N3 instead?

[Leonshade]

If CFJ was telling the truth about JKing Sgz13 N2, then the only one who could have blocked/stopped my investigation N2 would be 1-Shot's slot.

To clarify: CFJ JKing Sgz13 would clear both of them from blocking my investigation, and Heartache tracking McMenno clears both of them.

I also considered Heartache being Ascetic. That would mean a Heartache/1-Shot scumteam, as 1-Shot would be lying about his NA result. But then what motive does Heartache have to lie about his investigation on me failing? I'd already claimed my role, so he would know.

[callforjudgement]

Agree that it's obvious that someone's lying.

With six players alive, there are 15 possible scumteams. That's a small enough number to analyse them individually to see if the night actions make sense. I'm not going to assume anything about scum claims being honest (unlike McMenno, I think that's a really dangerous assumption!), and am going to assume that scum killed N2 but might or might not have killed N3:

CFJ + 1SVT: I don't see any theory reason why this would be impossible (of course, I know I'm town so I can discount this possibility, but I'm listing it to help the rest of town try to solve the game), this could be explained by 1SVT having some sort of blocking role and lying about his actions;
CFJ + Heartache: Possible; this would require both me and Heartache to be lying about targets/results, but could happen with the claimed roles;
CFJ + McMenno/Sgz13/Leonshade: All three of these are possible, but require an unclaimed role to exist to explain Heartache's no-result N3;
1SVT + Heartache: I don't see any reason why this wouldn't work, given that it would explain all the contradictory investigative data, although it would require a nightkill

on

Sgz13 (or a no-action gambit) N2;
1SVT + McMenno: This situation seems most likely if 1SVT is a rolestopper. He could have rolestopped his buddy McMenno N1, Heartache N2, Leonshade N3. Again, this requires an nightkill on Sgz13, but there's a plausible explanation in this case: nothing in this scenario confirms that McMenno is vanilla (he didn't act N2 but could have had an N1, odd-night, or non-consecutive modifier), and McMenno could therefore have somehow determined Sgz13's role night 1, which would make him a high kill priority.
1SVT + Sgz13: Again, if 1SVT is blocking night actions, there don't seem to be any problems here (this works with roleblocker, rolestopper,

or

jailkeeper). This scenario is particularly plausible because it's trivial to explain the missing kills in this one.
1SVT + Leonshade: This is very similar to the 1SVT + McMenno case, although like in the previous case, 1SVT can have any blocking role and it still works.
Heartache + McMenno: This works fine if McMenno blocked Leonshade's night action N2. We only have Heartache's word that McMenno wasn't responsible for that. Again, it'd need Sgz13 to be the nightkill.
Heartache + Sgz13: I can't see a sensible way to make this work; if Heartache were Ascetic (to block Leonshade's N2 action) it would also have blocked 1SVT's N3 action. I guess you can make it work if

both

scum players have some sort of roleblocking/rolestopping role (Heartache blocking my action N2, Sgz13 blocking Leonshade's action N2, and 1SVT being the kill target), but that seems fairly unlikely.
Heartache + Leonshade: Straightforwardly works, because most of the investigative results can be lies.
McMenno + Sgz13: I don't think there's any way to explain Leonshade's no-result N2 in this situation, unless a townie is lying. So this case is likely impossible.
McMenno + Leonshade: Works if Leonshade has an unclaimed Ascetic modifier; also mathematically works (but is less plausible) if McMenno is an odd-night rolestopper. There are two possible explanations for the lack of kill: Sgz13 being the kill target N2 (again, note that there's no confirmation of McMenno's role, only that he didn't act N2, so he could have discovered Sgz13's role N1); or Leonshade interfering with my night action N2 (meaning that Sgz13's Weak Doctor action saved 1SVT's life; note that if Leonshade has an Ascetic modifier, we have zero confirmation of what his actual role is).
Sgz13 + Leonshade: Works if Leonshade has an unclaimed Ascetic modifier. I don't think there are any other explanations, because neither Sgz13 nor Leonshade could have roleblocked Heartache or rolestopped Leonshade N3.

Now I've done that, I feel a bit disappointed; I was hoping that the night actions would exclude a ton of possible scumteams (especially because McMenno was implying they would), but most of them seem to still be viable.

McMenno, why did you assume that everyone was being honest about their role? This gives me a bit of a bad taste in my mouth,

especially[/] because a) you claimed VT, and b) there's no confirmation by anyone that you're vanilla (only that you didn't act N2).

[Leonshade]

@callforjudgement:

So who do you actually think is scum, from your perspective?

[callforjudgement]

I'm pretty concerned about many of the slots, really. I reread the Heartache and 1SVT slots first in order to determine who to popcorn to, and neither filled me with a huge amount of confidence. Heartache appears to have been doing more pushing lynches than actual scumhunting, which is concerning because it implies a lack of concern as to whether the lynches are actually on scum. Meanwhile, 1SVT (the player, not the slot) doesn't seem to have any reads that aren't based on theory or a very cursory read, and doesn't seem to be spending much effort on trying to scumhunt (he's admitted he hasn't read through your slot ever, in #493). Tere (the same slot) spent much of her time active lurking (the posts mostly consist of information dumps); I'm conflicted about what I think about the Heartache push (it looks genuine earlier on but more artificial later; it seems to go from genuine read to tunnelling to thinking that Heartache is town but needs to be lynched anyway? (#408)). Sgz's ISO is also fairly terrible; it's full of mostly meaningless one-liners which makes it very annoying to read.

@1SVT

: why did you change from thinking Heartache was scum to thinking Heartache was town in #486?

[Heartache]

Those are some weak views, californiajudgement. Would you like to take a stance?

[Heartache]

There cannot be 2 protective roles, and weak doctor seems more believable than jailkeeper. Hmm.

[Heartache]

If I jailed someone 2 nights and there were 2 no-kills, I would probably just assume they were the scum, but you don't seem that convinced.

[callforjudgement]

I normally spend days re-evaluating my reads in lylo (and observing how other people interact, and asking them questions) even when I've been playing the game for a long time already.

Having just replaced in and done basic ISOs and spent time getting to grips with the theory but not much else, I don't have any reads that are strong enough to push them yet. So no, I'm not going to start pushing reads unless I'm at least reasonably sure that they're correct.

In your opinion, is it normally correct strategy for players to push reads that they aren't sure about?

PEDIT: Also, there can totally be two protective roles. Please read the setup generation information in the OP. The roles were all generated at random; there is no mechanic preventing duplicate or similar roles, and no mechanic requiring the game to be balanced. This isn't a normal game.

[Leonshade]

There cannot be 2 protective roles

Why not?

Agreed on CFJ's non-committal views, though. Willing to give him a bit of slack for having just replaced in, but he should have strong opinions on Sgz13 at this point.

[Heartache]

Well, there was already bodyguard. What are the chances of 3 protective roles? It would be too stacked.

[Leonshade]

Ninja'd by CFJ, forum didn't show his post in preview.

Pedit: This is a random game, S_S warned during sign-up that the setup might not turn out balanced.

[Leonshade]

Really, two VTs being rolled is less likely. But I'm not going to doubt McMenno's claim just because of that.

[Sgz13]

There cannot be 2 protective roles, and weak doctor seems more believable than jailkeeper. Hmm.

You previously stated you read the setup generation when 1shot came in. So you should know this totally is possible.

[Sgz13]

Really, two VTs being rolled is less likely. But I'm not going to doubt McMenno's claim just because of that.

2 VTs?

[Heartache]

The odds of 3 rolls being protective are just incredibly low. Statistically.

[callforjudgement]

@Leonshade: If Sgz is scum, it's with you or 1SVT.

I can understand why Gamma Emerald thought that Sgz was scum; he was blocking Sgz, there was no kill, it seems reasonable. However, a number of unexplained blocks have been claimed; and the fact that I was blocking Sgz repeatedly means that it's

less

likely that Sgz is responsible (because being blocked means that he couldn't block anyone else). Meanwhile, there's a need to explain the no-kill, and most likely either Sgz was performing the kill, or Sgz was the target (likely because scum had somehow determined he was a Weak Doctor and thus a huge threat).

Do you think I should have strong views on Sgz based on dayplay, or only on night actions? If it's based on night actions, then why don't you think 1SVT is scum?