Mini Normal 2299 | Postgame [Village win]

[redFF]

Dont replace me im here

[redFF]

Who are we lim today

[biancospino]

Votecount

VC 3-V

Alianna (1):

Doctor Drew (678)

Deltabreedy (1):

Hu Tao (702)

Hu Tao (1):

bristep123 (758)

Not Voting (6):

Emperor flippyNips, KittyTacky, redFF (720), Deltabreedy (741), Theta Alpine (742), Alianna (751)

With 9 alive, it takes 5 for an execution.

Modnotes:

• The deadline is due in (expired on 2023-05-11 00:00:00).

[Theta Alpine]

Can someone clarify where the assumption of a traitor has come from?

even before someone revealed that it was confirmed

enchant flipped with disloyal unstoppable and no active non-factional abilities
there is exactly one situation where this makes sense to have
if you will be targeting someone with your factional kill who is the same alignment as you and who has protection

in normals there is only one setup satisfying this without an assumption of purposely targeting a teammate you are aware of
and that is to have a bulletproof traitor

[Theta Alpine]

@Kitty - how exactly does your role work? Enchant was executed D2 and you checked Delta N2, so if it's just them and a traitor, they technically have no one to talk to in the PT. I realize 3 scum + traitor is technically possible, just interested in this scenario. Would you get a positive or negative result on groupscum if they're the last one left, assuming they can't communicate in another way?

I get a guilty if they're not alone in a PT. So sole scum would get an inno even if traitor. So innos are pretty soft. I have a hunch it's 3 scum and tater however.

aaaaaaaaaa
okay so delta is a bit less cleared then i am
though neither of us are really cleared to begin with due to possibility of traitor
and yeah i am also thinking we have two grouped scum and one traitor left so

in that situation
we have three people completely cleared of being group scum and two targets left out of six
along with the potential for the traitor to be in the six instead of being one of me or delta

let me think a bit more
the enchant wagon went up fast
like i said delta was the only vote i thought might be bussing
i am just trying to figure out what i am missing here

[Theta Alpine]

kitty changed their play in regards to the information they claimed to have received before enchants flip
so i think that claim is truthful and i do not see traffic analyst as being a potential scum role

so that leaves us with five targets left with assumed two group scum within them
if there is only one group scum + traitor left then we can afford to figure that out later
plus out of the semi-confirmed people i think it should be fairly obvious that me and delta are only same alignment if we are both town

so we have 2 out of 5 or 3 out of 5 if we have two group scum left depending on if me or delta is a traitor
the absolute worst case scenario is if i was traitor and delta was final group scum but assuming we are not in that situation and that all claims so far are truthful there is at least one scum within bristep | flippy | hu tao | alianna | doctor drew

and at this point it is just a question of
did scum bus or not
cause that narrows things down further

[Alianna]

I can see 3 + traitor, but wouldn't Kitty's role technically be stronger in that setup than in 2 + traitor?

[Alianna]

Regardless of the number, they're probably stacked.

[Deltabreedy]

I don't trust Red's claim.

Here's why:

Knowing what we know now, #75 reads more like Scum!RedFF pushing away from traitor discussion. At the time justifiably so, so I think it went under the radar a bit - but in retrospect and aligning with the rest of their play it kind of makes sense.

Votes on Enchant and Theta in #84 and #117 have minimal justification but provide a degree of 'activity' without actually including any genuine scumhunting. This is then justified when FL challenges it in #154 where from there it does turn defensive. This gets called out but again their lack of activity after this means that they go pretty un-noticed.

In #222 there is another odd interaction with FL, wherein the prior interaction had shown FL to be doing some digging around Red's defensive posturing, but I think Red feigns ignorance in response to Flavour's admittedly quite coded posting. It reads to me as more of a vibe check - 'Who are you leaning scum on?' here =

Do you think I am scum?

Then there is effectively a 4 day period of inactivity. A few prod dodges that don't advance the game whilst ill - I don't count being ill as AI, of course - but returning to the game saying 'I got really sick over the weekend' when the inactivity was from Tues 23rd (#222) to Thurs 25th (#334 doesn't check out at all. Again, I feel this went relatively un-noticed. Lurking into the background has worked for Red and it's only really after the opportunistic vote on me and then the 3rd prod that I woke up and saw it.

#384 continues this trend of non-justified wagonpushing. At this point they're on Theta's wagon - and taking the assumption that Theta is town, Red would be keen on pushing this in bad faith, knowing who scum are. Being fine with all three wagons without actually having any reasoning behind them, not even spoken about vibes is inherently scummy to me - it might just be a playstyle thing but it also fits in with the rest of the gameplay so far.

Voting Mewtaph (Confirmed town by way of death) to E-1 without justification in #416 (coming after Mewtaph has called out RedFF for lurking in #3600 feels like Lurk!Scum looking for an easy way to A) Push a mislim and B) Push someone who suspects them out. By being so distant and in the background - from memory no-body connected this dot D2.

The justification for the Mew wagon from Red comes in D2, but again with nothing of substance to back it up. #478 reads as an attempt to move past it and move past any kind of VCA - and to be honest for me it worked. I didn't even clock thinking about it until now. By being aware of who scum is - Red can play along quite easily with FL's claim - which of course by way of death we know to be true. #479 curries favour with FL who Scum!Red would know to be powerful town and justifies the actions subsequently.

The big issue I have with this is the JK claim.

None of Red's actions feel like they have the goal of advancing the gamestate, or even finding scum. I don't read any willingness to find and lim scum from any of their posts - there's barely-existent questioning, a sense of complete apathy and to be honest if it wasn't for the claim, on a re-read I would have them absolutely locked as scum. Naked votes, opportunistic chances to put people at E-1 being taken - I just don't read Red's ISO or the associatives with Enchant and see anything other than scum.

The existance of the JK-enabler role is the literal only thing that slices up the argument and I'm having a real hard time getting past it.

Someone tell me I'm being an idiot here, but I'm really struggling with this one.

--

I also take issue with Alianna and Hu Tao for some of the same reasons, but I want players to audit my thought process above first.

Ninja'd by 4+ posts - will respond in new post.

[Theta Alpine]

claiming jk in that situation is
a really iffy move if scum and not jailkeeper
cause it begs for a jailkeeper to cc

unfortunately red is no longer the most likely night kill so we will not get to see what happens there yet

[Alianna]

I take issue with the redFF case for a couple of reasons.

1. They're the jailkeeper claim. Fakeclaiming jailkeeper as scum is risky because the existence of a jailkeeper-enabler implies they're likely to get counterclaimed. It's possible that scum!redFF actually is a jailkeeper, but I don't know how likely it is that scum would have both a jailkeeper and a jailkeeper-enabler. Does anyone here know more about setup design to answer that?
2. Meta. Namely from this game, where they repped into a town slot, never really caught up on the game, were very inactive, put two wagons to E-1 with zero justification (one scum, one town), and got misexecuted. The "sense of complete apathy" that you speak of was present in that game too. I'm inclined to think this is just how they play.

[redFF]

i claimed because i figured a scum enabler to my role would be sus, i assumed enablers were usually of the same alignment, so i figured claiming now rather than it coming out later was the best move.

[redFF]

i claimed because i figured a scum enabler to my role would be sus, i assumed enablers were usually of the same alignment, so i figured claiming now rather than it coming out later was the best move.

[redFF]

I don't trust Red's claim.

Here's why:

Knowing what we know now, #75 reads more like Scum!RedFF pushing away from traitor discussion. At the time justifiably so, so I think it went under the radar a bit - but in retrospect and aligning with the rest of their play it kind of makes sense.

Votes on Enchant and Theta in #84 and #117 have minimal justification but provide a degree of 'activity' without actually including any genuine scumhunting. This is then justified when FL challenges it in #154 where from there it does turn defensive. This gets called out but again their lack of activity after this means that they go pretty un-noticed.

In #222 there is another odd interaction with FL, wherein the prior interaction had shown FL to be doing some digging around Red's defensive posturing, but I think Red feigns ignorance in response to Flavour's admittedly quite coded posting. It reads to me as more of a vibe check - 'Who are you leaning scum on?' here =

Do you think I am scum?

Then there is effectively a 4 day period of inactivity. A few prod dodges that don't advance the game whilst ill - I don't count being ill as AI, of course - but returning to the game saying 'I got really sick over the weekend' when the inactivity was from Tues 23rd (#222) to Thurs 25th (#334 doesn't check out at all. Again, I feel this went relatively un-noticed. Lurking into the background has worked for Red and it's only really after the opportunistic vote on me and then the 3rd prod that I woke up and saw it.

#384 continues this trend of non-justified wagonpushing. At this point they're on Theta's wagon - and taking the assumption that Theta is town, Red would be keen on pushing this in bad faith, knowing who scum are. Being fine with all three wagons without actually having any reasoning behind them, not even spoken about vibes is inherently scummy to me - it might just be a playstyle thing but it also fits in with the rest of the gameplay so far.

Voting Mewtaph (Confirmed town by way of death) to E-1 without justification in #416 (coming after Mewtaph has called out RedFF for lurking in #3600 feels like Lurk!Scum looking for an easy way to A) Push a mislim and B) Push someone who suspects them out. By being so distant and in the background - from memory no-body connected this dot D2.

The justification for the Mew wagon from Red comes in D2, but again with nothing of substance to back it up. #478 reads as an attempt to move past it and move past any kind of VCA - and to be honest for me it worked. I didn't even clock thinking about it until now. By being aware of who scum is - Red can play along quite easily with FL's claim - which of course by way of death we know to be true. #479 curries favour with FL who Scum!Red would know to be powerful town and justifies the actions subsequently.

The big issue I have with this is the JK claim.

None of Red's actions feel like they have the goal of advancing the gamestate, or even finding scum. I don't read any willingness to find and lim scum from any of their posts - there's barely-existent questioning, a sense of complete apathy and to be honest if it wasn't for the claim, on a re-read I would have them absolutely locked as scum. Naked votes, opportunistic chances to put people at E-1 being taken - I just don't read Red's ISO or the associatives with Enchant and see anything other than scum.

The existance of the JK-enabler role is the literal only thing that slices up the argument and I'm having a real hard time getting past it.

Someone tell me I'm being an idiot here, but I'm really struggling with this one.

--

I also take issue with Alianna and Hu Tao for some of the same reasons, but I want players to audit my thought process above first.

Ninja'd by 4+ posts - will respond in new post.

what a bunch of hogwash

[redFF]

so if we have town as
delta
theta
kitty
myself

then i'd also add as people i read as town
alianna
bristep

then my lim pool today is
drew
emperor
hutao

[redFF]

i really don't feel we should lim delta or theta on the off chance they are traitor, we should try and lim scum

[redFF]

VOTE: hutao i dont like his reaction to my claim today

[Alianna]

I agree with that.

A Traitor is considered Normal on mafiascum.net, as long as it:

- is Mafia-aligned
- knows the identities of all of the Mafia team
- identity is not known by the Mafia team, although they should know a Traitor exists
- cannot be recruited to join the rest of the Mafia team, and (unless Bulletproof) is killed if shot

- is endgamed if all other Mafia are dead

- gives a "guilty" result to Cops, an "innocent" result to Gunsmiths, and a "Traitor" result to Role Cops

Traitor-hunting is pointless. We should never execute Theta, and we should only go for Delta if we're sure the setup is 2 + traitor and there are no good execution options.

[Alianna]

^
Agreeing on not executing Delta or Theta. Not sure about Hu Tao.

[Hu Tao]

so
i am trying to figure out
did group scum not bus enchant at all

cause either group scum did not bus or
bristep or hu tao is group scum

Even though I'm in the group who voted Enchant, I think it would be silly to rule out scum bussing

[Hu Tao]

Sorry, been a hella busy week with work and other shenanigans. I’ll get to reading back this days activity. For now, because I don’t think Enchant’s elim was scum fred

VOTE: hu tao

What does this post even mean

[Hu Tao]

*scum free.

Oh okay. That's fair but why does that make you just jump to the conclusion that scum bussed?

[Hu Tao]

*even if there's a traitor

Why is everyone convinced there is a traitor? I'm confused

[Alianna]

Kitty is claiming to be informed of the existence of a traitor.

[Hu Tao]

*even if there's a traitor

I mean, even you don't believe that it's confirmed?

Oh jeez. I was talking about how Traffic Analyst works. I was correcting my post here because I missed a word. I do believe it's confirmed BECAUSE IT WAS IN MY ROLE CARD. -_- idk how this wasn't obvious.

@Kitty - how exactly does your role work? Enchant was executed D2 and you checked Delta N2, so if it's just them and a traitor, they technically have no one to talk to in the PT. I realize 3 scum + traitor is technically possible, just interested in this scenario. Would you get a positive or negative result on groupscum if they're the last one left, assuming they can't communicate in another way?

I get a guilty if they're not alone in a PT. So sole scum would get an inno even if traitor. So innos are pretty soft. I have a hunch it's 3 scum and tater however.

Yeah idk either. But it's now confirmed.

Confirmed how?

This is probably fine.

VOTE: Deltabreedy

E-1.

@Theta - where was the possible traitor crumb from Kitty?

Okay I feel if I don't come out, Delta will hang.

I am a Village Informed Traffic Analyst.

First off, my informed is that there's a traitor and that there's a lazy modifier somewhere. They are not necessarily on the same person.

Then, my results:
N1 - Theta can't privately communicate. That's why I gave up my Theta push and softed it.
N2 - Delta can't privately communicate. Ditto.

If there is even scum between those it has to be the traitor. Possible both are just LHF town.

I also crumbed it here:
[float][/float]

Sorry I wasn't very active yesterday I didn't have the will ta play much now I do.

"ta". O and A are very far from each other, and I'm not doing a Scottish accent gimmick this game.

Oh right I forgot the first part of the lazy post