biancospino's Mini Normal Review, March 2023 (Released)

[Datisi]

Primary: mastina
Secondary: Datisi

Also hi Dats, I'm actually doing a Mini because you asked but seems like you won't actually be able to play it :/

well, your mini would be next in line to be run, and team mafia is starting Soon, and i'm really not able to play in more than one game at the time anymore :/ and i wanted to at least be present for the review

reading the setup now

[Datisi]

okay, so.

i love the idea of this setup. i really do. however, with both the existence of a ton of enablers, and the lazy traitor (i love that role btw), AND the possibility of the lazy traitor becoming a last-scum-standing groupscum WHILE being false-innoed...

i don't think this can be a normal setup, even with the complex modifier public.

the difference between "a setup with a lot of power roles" and "a setup with a lot of power roles, but a lot of them are enabled" is that the latter has many many more moving parts in it, which makes it more difficult to balance, and more confusing to play.

and as it stands, i think the town is way too weak here - and they're weak in a way where "adding more power roles" just doesn't fix the issue, because it pushes the setup even further from the realm of "normal".

i think a normal setup that has the mechanic of "a lot of enablers" can definitely be made. but it would have to be a bit simplified.

[Datisi]

if the lazy traitor were to work with a traffic analyst, i think they would have to be informed that they can get a false inno.

but i don't think that fixes the "this setup is too mechanically heavy" issue

[Datisi]

i mean, my thoughts were along the lines of removing the unstoppable and the ninja from the scumteam, rather than removing the traitor. and potentially removing the red herring enablers from the town

that was my idea of simplifying the setup, at least

would still need to hear mastina's thoughts, tho

[Datisi]

theoretically? yes, they could

but you can't balance the game by assuming the best case but unlikely scenario for town will happen

(to be clear, i'm not saying the setup without unstoppable/ninja would necessarily be balanced, i haven't thought through it fully yet, and it'd be up to mastina anyway. but it is a potential way to tone down the complexity of the setup, which is our first goal here. actual balance discussion happens after that)

[Datisi]

that is understandable

if that is the core idea, there might be a way to make the setup simpler elsewhere. i''ll wait to see what mastina thinks

[Datisi]

bianco, would you be satisfied with a setup whose only enablers are the jailkeeper enabler and the watcher enabler?

mastina, do you think a setup like the one in 19 or 21 would be passable as normal, considering the number of enablers it has? i'm leaning on "no", but i'm not sure if i'm being too strict

[Datisi]

TA-enabler lazy traitor + town TA (on top of jk/watcher stuff) would also be fine, i think.

i don't think "town roles get confimed via their claim" is actually an issue. in fact, it seems pretty necessary for balance, considering the town feels pretty weak still.

[Datisi]

i would recommend against putting in two novice TAs. i'm not sure if this is balanced, but i *do* know it's very swingy. it's impossible to know in advance whether both will be believed or if they'll start getting eliminated, whether they'll be able to get any useful results or if a scum will die before they're able to get anything, etc etc...

while "in theory" a setup like this could be balanced, in practice it's likely to turn out either too townsided or too scumsided, depending on how the game plays out.

if you're fine with that possibility, we can work on making a setup like this balanced. but i would recommend against it

[Datisi]

i think the second one veers into too townsided, as it turns the TAs into masons basically.

it's up to mastina though, as she's the primary. so i'll wait for her thoughts now.

[Datisi]

one thing that i am kind of worried about

"lazy traitor" is a role that hasn't ever been used (iirc). i don't think even the most normals-savvy players are gonna think of the possibility of that role existing.

so, in the event that two main scum flip, and the game is not yet over, AND the TA outs the info that there is a traitor in the game - i fear people might start thinking they're dealing with a 4-person scumteam. and sure, that is gonna get disproved once they get to final 3, but i feel like it would wreak havoc on the game in the meantime.

so i would potentially make it public information that there are 3 players aligned with the mafia.

though that brings its own problems, maybe they'd think the TA is lying if two main scum flip and they claim there's a traitor and the game doesn't end...

[Datisi]

enabler-finder feels like it might become a cop if scum starts flipping and there's a good mech player in town who can deduce the roles of the other scum

[Datisi]

Hi. I know I'm not a reviewer but I'd go with 4 town PR max in a Mini Normal. If I rolled scum and there were 5 PRs I'd feel a bit hard done by, especially since one of my team is a Traitor.

you can't be thinking of it in terms of solely "is a TPR" or "is not a TPR".

i'll look at the setup in 42, one sec

[Datisi]

it's... probably fine?

i think my biggest concern is the BP-finder. a townie is informed that there is a traitor (bulletproof traitor is a semi-common role) which makes them likely to think there is one. and if the disloyal strongman flips, that all but confirms there traitor is BP, because why else would the strongman be disloyal.

my first thought is to remove the multitasking from that role, and make both of its abilities 1-shot instead of 2-shot. but ofc, up to you and mastina.

[Datisi]

i guess my other concern is what happens when scum starts dying. i said i'm fine with the town PR getting conftowned upon scum death (due to setup spec), but that's not the only thing that happens here. the finders *also* become stronger upon a scum flip, if town is good at figuring out the setup. which is why i kinda wanna nerf them a lil bit.

[Datisi]

However I do worry that this wording would pretty much confirm to the Traitor that there are no lazy-Enablers

why do i feel like a very similar discussion had occurred somewhere in an NRG review... i can't remember where.

i think? the final verdict was that the first case is fine (i.e. using the first case doesn't *actually* rule out the existence of a lazy-enabler)

as for ruling out a second traitor, you can just change it into something like "when all scum but you are dead".

[Datisi]

come to think of it, not sure if a lazy-enabler is even normal, currently.

[Datisi]

as for ruling out a second traitor, you can just change it into something like "when all scum but you are dead".

I mean, I can't really, since the lazy Traitor would be endgamed if all non-Traitors wolves are dead but there are still another Traitor alive. But in a scumteam of three there may not be two Traitors anyway, so that's (probably?) not really a problem -- btw, a Traitor should know the identities of the entire scumteam,

including potential additional Traitors

, correct?

yes, you can? the fact that they'd get endgamed at 2 traitors alive doesn't mean you can't use "if you're the last member of the mafia alive, you become a full mafia member". that sentence simply explains what happens if they are the last scum standing, but it does NOT say it's possible for that scenario to occur.

i'm pretty sure there cannot be 2 traitors in a team of 3. and no, if there's 2 traitors, they're not aware who the other traitor is. source: played a normal once where i was scum and we had two traitors, and they both thought this random townie was the other traitor. very fun.

[Datisi]

please stop thinking about it as "5 PRs" without thought of what they actually are, that's not how games work.

[Datisi]

scum is capable of lying about their role, and town is capable of misyeeting TPRs.

[Datisi]

uh, sorry, i've been sick the past few days and thinking has been hard. i'll try to take a look at this today

[Datisi]

i looked at role PMs, i think they're fine, but the VT one is missing an area tag

the public info should be changed i think, since we changed a lot of the setup. i'm not sure if we need it at all anymore, since the necessary players are informed individually

[Datisi]

i would prefer if a complex tag were used, yes