TM 2023 | Mini Normal | Endgame

[Shirou]

ok ok

it's 2 AM

Shirou you really gotta go now

pls someone hammer something before I wake up again. I like when things die I'm edgy like that I never got out of my teenager phase sorry

(and I hope it's DeasVail?? )

[mastina]

I'll not let go of this single point. Your take on the loud rolecop being unable to fakeclaim or play around the roaming watcher is trash and the scummiest thing in your entire ISO. Now I really gotta sleep, goodnight.

Well if that's the scummiest thing in my iso my iso is spot-clean then because that's an absolute truth.

I'm literally speaking as an NRG reviewer here, sharing absolute truth.

You're calling me a fucking liar in me doing my fucking job.

It is a fact that a loud rolecop cannot hide visiting.
It is a fact that being unable to hide visiting restricts scum players in their freedom.
It is a fact that in this setup, that restriction doesn't have a realistic balance--in fringe scenarios, it can be dealt with, but NRG reviewers don't balance off of fringe scenarios, which is also

fact

.

I'm sharing nothing but facts.

You are looking at those facts and arguing they aren't true.

[mastina]

basically a scum loud rolecop can fakeclaim most common investigative roles, and it doesn't even need to claim investigative. The more info you PR gives, the easier to fakeclaim it is. It's easy to fakeclaim a lot of stuff with rolecop.

Yes, a scum loud rolecop can fakeclaim.
My argument isn't that they can't.
My argument is that requiring them to (especially when said fakeclaim can be easily caught by a role scum wouldn't know about) in this setup wouldn't be balanced. It would remove agency from the scumteam in a game where they already have a fair amount of restrictions on agency.

[mastina]

I don't think Koba defended Freedom directly?

So Koba swapping onto the Italiano wagon and pushing it when people were voting Freedom as the largest wagon previously, and Koba campaigning to them to flip Italiano instead of Freedom, and Koba then quickhammering Kowahbunga when Freedom was the alternative on D2, doesn't count as Koba defending Freedom?

Today I learned!

'Cause to me those actions are defense of Freedom!

[mastina]

and Freedom wasn't wagoned on "severe pressure" on D2. Literal fiction.

The 'severe pressure' was me borrowing

your

wording.
And I literally showed the suspicion on Freedom.

Freedom got

four

votes on D2 (albeit not all at once)--and everyone was going "Freedom or Kowahbunga", stating a preference within those two.

That is all fact, and I can and have quoted that.

[DeasVail]

Ugh okay I don’t have the energy/time rn to read all the stuff but I think this is e-1?

VOTE: Freedom

I think it’s down to you DGB

[mastina]

(YOU CLAIMED ROLECOP BEFORE AND WASN'T SUSPECTED).

I claimed rolecop and wasn't suspected before massclaim.

Once massclaim came out I began to be accused of being a stereotypical scum role.

That makes the balance issues remain.

Again--the scum roleblocker doesn't need to claim anything. The scum roleblocker is shown...via having blocked a town PR and not having claimed the block. That exposes the scum roleblocker as existing, because if it were a town action the town player would claim it; by the block existing yet being unclaimed, a scum roleblocker (or at least a scum role causing failure of some kind) is guaranteed to exist the moment a town player reports a failure of their action.

The rolecop doesn't need to claim anything. The rolecop is shown...via being loud. That exposes the rolecop as existing, not in role itself but in being a PR of some kind, requiring a claim of some kind. Truthful, lie, a loud rolecop cannot choose to not claim. They are

required

to claim

something

.

Requiring the rolecop to claim something,
And having the roleblocker become known as scum just from any town action failing unexpectedly,
Means that the scum lack agency.

[Freedom]

- Koba says that there's scum in the hood and that it's DV and/or xof

Hmm, this sounds familiar...

Arko, my predecessor, thought there was scum in hood. Kowah and Mala agreed.

What are the odds of a town player saying nearly the exact same thing as a scum player? At...well this is why I wanted timestamps, it's hard to tell exactly when, but...at what

appears

to be around the same time?

Like I said--I asked for timestamps for a fucking reason.

'Cause if those were near the same time, then chances are...yaknow.

Freedom and Koba both said the same thing because they are scumbuddies.

Arko said that around 15 April.

[DeasVail]

Idk for sure that freedom is scum so please don’t auto-lim him or anything if I do die.

Something that’s been on my mind is whether it is just better for me to die at this point, but if Freedom is scum then that would probably clear me so I think it’s worth a shot at least.

[mastina]

How is this broken on massclaim on D1??

Well with me as town, it's not.

With me as scum, you get, what, seven? eight? players all likely to be town by claim.

A game where you can clear half the town on D1 and have the PRs further help solidify this isn't balanced.

The only way to prevent this game from being broken by massclaim on D1 is...

...For me to be town.

[Freedom]

Ugh okay I don’t have the energy/time rn to read all the stuff but I think this is e-1?

VOTE: Freedom

I think it’s down to you DGB

Is mastina voting me?

[Freedom]

Actually, she is.

[mastina]

literally how would it be broken in a massclaim I just realized that's also bullshit
not only no one massclaim in D1, if we massclaimed you would know who the watche/protectives are
literal what the fuck are you talking about

The VT would become an IC. Since this game has neighborhoods, scum can't counterclaim the VT, the player who is the VT is going to be confirmed as town no matter what.
One conftown.
The compulsive fruit vendors are mirror roles--with a role watcher in the game, their lack of multitasking modifier could be established, and a

compulsive

fruit vendor who

doesn't have multitasking

is conftown because they cannot kill due to being compelled to deliver fruit.
Three conftown.

The role watcher is likely to be seen as town by role alone, especially due to being Loud, and if the scum kill the Loud Watcher, they are leaving the fruit vendors and the VT alive. And remember, with a roaming roleblocker, scum can only block the role watcher once. So scum have a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" moment--they can block the role watcher once, they can kill the role watcher, but if they kill the role watcher they spare the conftown and since the role watcher can only be blocked once the role watcher will continue to be able to confirm players until killed.

Effectively, four conftown.

The roaming announcing doctor is able to protect a player--say the scum do target one of the conftown. While the doctor can only stop a kill on that player once, one failed kill given the jailkeeper gives a high chance of scum losing a day. Again, scum can only block the doctor once, and killing the doctor leaves the conftown alive.

Effectively, five conftown.

The jailkeeper can't stop final scum, but can stop scum any time prior to that--with a massclaim having gone through, the jailkeeper would know who they can safely target and who they should avoid targeting. Scum can roleblock the jailkeeper once, but scum cannot reliably stop the jailkeeper. To stop the jailkeeper they either need to get down to only one scum alive (not great), or kill the jailkeeper.

Depending on your thoughts, may or may not be six conftown.

The indecisive personal follower can't catch scum, but can verify claims--scum lying risk being caught by the personal follower, and town telling the truth about being blocked will be able to be verified, reducing the chances that scum get a PR mislim significantly because Ydrasse would verify the PR's claim that they didn't act at the very least.

And then you want to have the roleblocker a stereotypical scum role, be paired with a rolecop another stereotypical scum role that is required to claim SOME role?

That ain't balanced.

That gives the scum virtually zero counterplay and incredibly low agency.

The game makes a lot more sense if there's a scum in the other PR claims. Something that instead of being detrimental to claim...is beneficial to claim.

A scum jailkeeper claiming would not be seen as a scum role.
A scum role watcher claiming would not be seen as a scum role.
A scum announcing doctor would not be seen as a scum role.

Any of those roles being scum would prevent massclaim from breaking the game in favor of the town.
All of them being town would make a massclaim be unloseable for the town.

[Freedom]

mastina, when I flip Town, who do you think scum will be?

[mastina]

You've argued that the solution to a Loud Rolecop being a rolecop which is a role that is stereotypically a scum role is for the loud rolecop to lie.

What? I said it was POSSIBLE, not that you always should do it. There isn't a set way to play scum PR, it depends on what happens in the game.
You are the one arguing that rolecop cannot fakeclaim succesfully or something

My argument isn't that the rolecop cannot successfully fakeclaim at all period--my argument is that the rolecop cannot be required to fakeclaim for the game to be balanced.

My argument is that the rolecop being Loud is required to claim

something

--meaning they MUST either tell the truth, or lie.
My argument is that requiring the rolecop to tell a lie in order to not be suspected of being a scum rolecop is a design decision which would never pass review, because ramrodding scum into being forced to fakeclaim removes scum agency.

The loud rolecop cannot hide performing an action.
That is a fact.
The loud rolecop must claim something.
That is a fact.
The loud rolecop must then either choose to lie, or choose to tell the truth.
That is a fact.
The loud rolecop if telling the truth is likely to be suspected by virtue of rolecops being a scum role.
That is a fact.
The loud rolecop if telling a lie is thus being pressured into doing so to avoid the above--and risks being caught in the lie. That, also fact.

That is not good design, and would never pass review.

Meanwhile, a town rolecop versus a role more commonly seen as town? (Literally all of doctor/jailkeeper/role watcher type roles.)

That gives the scum a lot more freedom.

[mastina]

I think it's Mastina + DV most likely and Mastina comes here trying to drown everyone with her wallposts and ignoring any discussion about DeasVail, and I feel the NEED to try to combat her and not let her completely drown the thread

Funny, that's the way I feel about you on Freedom!

I'll be blunt with you.

If it were anyone but you arguing about DeasVail I would've listened to them instantly.

And even with you, it's not an intentional rejection of your DV case, so much as a justifiable lack of sheeping it--I know you are a proven liar in your cases, you cased DV, and therefore I am going to assume the DV case likely has lies within.

I would analyze the DV case if I had more time to do so.

Given the chance, I would review it--and if the case actually were free of lies? I'd need to have a fundamental reassessment.

Unfortunately, I didn't get that chance.

But arguing that I am ignoring DV discussion is disingenuous as fuck.

I am open to discussion.

I am not open to being demanded to be followed, least of all from a proven liar.

[mastina]

I don't know how I'm gonna function tomorrow at work with less than 4 hours of sleep now but we'll see

Well wadda ya know, I get up at 3:30 am and it's 11 pm now.

I'm not even done yet and I'm going to be getting less than four hours of sleep.

[mastina]

I absolutely hate this game btw

My turn to say you don't get to steal my thing btw.

I have dibs on this.

I seem to recall when I did it, though, you called it scum AtE? Or something along those lines.

[Freedom]

I think it's Mastina + DV most likely and Mastina comes here trying to drown everyone with her wallposts and ignoring any discussion about DeasVail, and I feel the NEED to try to combat her and not let her completely drown the thread

Funny, that's the way I feel about you on Freedom!

I'll be blunt with you.

If it were anyone but you arguing about DeasVail I would've listened to them instantly.

And even with you, it's not an intentional rejection of your DV case, so much as a justifiable lack of sheeping it--I know you are a proven liar in your cases, you cased DV, and therefore I am going to assume the DV case likely has lies within.

I would analyze the DV case if I had more time to do so.

Given the chance, I would review it--and if the case actually were free of lies? I'd need to have a fundamental reassessment.

Unfortunately, I didn't get that chance.

But arguing that I am ignoring DV discussion is disingenuous as fuck.

I am open to discussion.

I am not open to being demanded to be followed, least of all from a proven liar.

Did you miss the part where DGB mentioned a SR on DV?

[mastina]

Mastina u still on that
damn

Yeah.

You insulted my honesty at my fucking job.

I tend to react poorly to being called a liar at my fucking job.

[mastina]

mastina, when I flip Town, who do you think scum will be?

Well you won't.

But in the event you did, we have confirmation there is a scum in the PRs, potentially two.

In the theoretically scenario where you're town, we get:
{DV, xofelf}
{DV, Shirou} (ahahaha no)
{DV, DGB}
{DV, Ausuka} (no)
{xofelf, Shirou} (I'm pretty sure that's a scumsided setup)
{xofelf, DGB} (probably scumsided)
{xofelf, Ausuka} (no)
{Shirou, DGB} (definitely scumsided)
{Shiro, Ausuka}
{DGB, Ausuka} (no)

So removing the 'no', that would leave the possible teams as:

{DV, xofelf}
{DV, DGB}
{Shirou, Ausuka}

I'd cross that bridge if I came to it solving those teams--but I won't need to because you're not actually town.

[mastina]

Did you miss the part where DGB mentioned a SR on DV?

If DGB provided reasons for it, I think I did in fact miss it.

I wouldn't call "maybe DV is just scum" to be a reason; that is what I remember DGB saying--which I admit, might be me having just not remembered what DGB said or maybe I missed DGB giving reason.

So if DGB gave an actual reason, that's my bad for not remembering it.

I've gotta go to bed now but will look for it during the night.

[Freedom]

Did you miss the part where DGB mentioned a SR on DV?

If DGB provided reasons for it, I think I did in fact miss it.

I wouldn't call "maybe DV is just scum" to be a reason; that is what I remember DGB saying--which I admit, might be me having just not remembered what DGB said or maybe I missed DGB giving reason.

So if DGB gave an actual reason, that's my bad for not remembering it.

I've gotta go to bed now but will look for it during the night.

Got that.
They didn't really mention reasons if that's what you're interested in.

[Freedom]

Though, they did mention DV not voting being weird.

[Ausuka]

if we had an NRG member alive and town who could chime in, they would side with me

Wow if only we had one of those, that would be so convenient

Oh well I guess we'll never know