>Calls the setup townsided.In post 3679, Mulch wrote:Holy townsided
>Scumteam had an absolute perfect win.
>
>Calls the setup townsided.In post 3679, Mulch wrote:Holy townsided
*Essentially make EVERY SINGLE NIGHTKILL A NINJA-STRONGMAN KILL, actually.In post 3743, mastina wrote:essentially make EVERY SINGLE NIGHTKILL A NINJA KILL
Well to put it lightly, I hardcore agree with the sentiment that this was a town loss more than a scum win.In post 3746, Mathdino wrote:Thoughts on people's actual play then mastina?
If given the scum strength of a fucking NINJA STRONGMAN? Which had a BACKUP IN CASE IT WENT DOWN EARLY?In post 3748, Mulch wrote:Unless you consider giving town 2 conf towns, a cop, killpower, and a watcher is “swingy”
The vigs are indeed both conftown if both actually get their shots off and don't end up shooting each other, shot, or lynched--all of which were incredibly realistic probabilities. Not just possibilities, PROBABILITIES. And sure enough both vigs were dead before D3. This wasn't some unlikely worst-case scenario which was something that the town just had bad luck in having happened. (Well it was the worst-case scenario, but it wasn't JUST the worst-case scenario made reality.) This was something which was quite likely to happen, and as it turned out, did.In post 3758, Firebringer wrote:The vigs are both conf town since normal standards you can’t argue scum Vigi
And the setup was literally made in such a way where this was not just a possibility--it was a probability. Which again actually came to pass. NOT ONLY does the cop have to dodge the vigs, BUT ALSO the cop has to dodge the scum nightkillThe only reason game didn’t go to Town was almost all town power was eliminated by night 2
Wrong. D2 is before the even-night vig gets to prove their claim. A cop claim is not proof of alignment or role and in fact would be seen as suspicious in a vig game. (Cops are rarely paired with vigs; most commonly, it's GUNSMITHS paired with a cop and thus a cop claim in a proven vig game is more likely to be seen as a fakeclaim. In fact I suggested in review doing exactly that but it was decided gunsmith was too much of a nerf to the town.)In post 3759, Firebringer wrote:4 people essentially could be confirmed town on day 2
You still have to get the clears or guilties when there are six ways for that to be prevented. (Town lynching the cop PRIOR to getting a clear/guilty, the cop investigating a vig kill which is significantly likely since cops and vigs have the exact same investigation pool, the cop investigating a scum kill which is a secondary option because cops can sometimes investigate townreads which scum are inclined to kill, the cop getting No Result rather than town/scum thanks to the asceticizer, the cop being nightkilled by the scum, or as it happened the cop being seen as vig-worthy and eating the bullet.)In post 3762, Firebringer wrote:You aren’t going to lynch a cop who is getting clears or guilties.
This is only applicable in a town which carries the mindset of "Let them prove their role and if they don't, lynch them the following day". This is a common enough mindset, but is not anywhere remotely close to a universal mindset. In ANY other mindset, then no. They are not in fact out of the lynch pool, nor should they be.And just because even night hasn’t yet proven role doesn’t mean they aren’t also essentially off the lynch pool as well.
The cop is nerfed because there are SIX different ways for their investigation to be nullified: the lynch, the scum nightkill on the cop's target, the vig kill on the cop's target, the scum asceticizing the cop's target, the scum nightkilling the cop, and as it happened, the vig killing the cop.In post 3763, Mulch wrote:“The cop is nerfed because they will get nightkilled if they get a guilty”?????
That's exactly what scum roles should be--dampeners for town roles. That's exactly what they functioned as. They served their purpose in reducing the strength of the town roles significantly.In post 3764, Firebringer wrote:The roles scum got can’t even really impact games they are just dampeners for Town roles
No it's like giving the town an AK-47 and giving scum a tool which can either be used as a bunker or an M-16, a versatile tool capable of both defense or offense depending on the usage of the role.This was like giving Town a machine gun and giving the scum a water pistol
It was a town loss not a scum win, yes, but it was also still a mafia win with the results which could not have gone worse for the town. But the fact that the town used the machine gun on itself, as it were, demonstrates that it was not in fact townsided.This wasn’t a real scum stomp and everyone has said so including yourself.
Yeah stopping you there because if you took both of those out, what you'd get is...In post 3765, Mulch wrote:If you took both of those out, it’s still cop-confirmed town odd night vig- confirmed town even night vig
Asceticizer does not quite cancel with Watcher because it can be used in a way beyond just countering the Watcher (it also exists as a counter to the cop, albeit not at the same time as it'd be a counter to the Watcher and the scumteam must choose which counter to use but this is no different between choosing between a ninja to counter a Watcher and a strongman to counter a protection more or less), but I'd say your comparison all the same would still hold regardless.In post 3770, Mathdino wrote:this game is equivalent to cop+vig+d3 innocent child vs 3 goons (watcher/asceticizer cancel)
That setup is considered balanced on MS because majority lynch hurts town
That's what I've been saying!In post 3771, Not_Mafia wrote:I think people are underestimating scum ascetisiser, that's an incredibly powerful scum role
I mean, that's your choice, but I've given my arguments for why the setup wasn't townsided and also my counters to the arguments you provided for why it is, so if you leave them unaddressed that's your decision but I maintain my stance.In post 3775, Firebringer wrote:I’m not going to sit here in argue with you when you are just going to just talk this topic to death.
Because the nine sentences which followed were off of the faulty premise of the first sentence and if responding to the first sentence automatically invalidates the following nine (it did), then no fucking shit that's what I'm going to do.In post 3778, Mulch wrote:1) why did you respond to 1 sentence of my argument of 10 sentences
I don't. Why do you keep acting like scum could only stop the watcher when they could use their role in another way?2) why do you keep acting like scum could stop the watcher and the cop at the same time
Not currently. I believe Nexus still makes them public after a while, though I could be mistaken and even if not I wouldn't know when exactly he'd do so.In post 3783, BuJaber wrote:Is the review thread publicaly accessible?