Open 289 - Hard Boiled - Game over.

[Abelcain]

@Darth, if you find any of my "present tense" loaded against you, it's only because I was reading your ISO and responding to it as it came up.

Firstly, lets start at the very beginning, a very good place to start. (Points for whoever can work out what the reference is from).

Pretty sure it's from The Sound of Music, but I couldn't tell you which song it's from.

Abelcain: Although now that I'm looking through your ISO your case against Snake is starting to make more sense than it did the first time around. I'll read it tomorrow when I'm less tired and can retain more information.

@ Abelcain: I've yet to see this, in which case do you mind looking into it today?

Of course, once I'm done catching up with your post here.

Abelcain: Having a scumread =/= necessarily thinking you're scummy. If someone did something really scummy once, but otherwise you felt like they were town, you'd have a scum read on them for the scummy thing but you'd still have town read overall.

No offence but this would be the stupidest post I've read in the entire thread, having a scum-read implies that you think they're mafia, whereas reading someone’s actions as scummy doesn't have to mean you think they're mafia. Either you've made a severe typo or don't understand that there's such thing as a scummy-town whereas there's no thing as a mafia-town.

No, I think we established that I was just operating under the wrong definition of "scumread." I understood a read as applying to any individual action as perceived by someone else. For example, Umbrage has gotten scumreads on Snake from not asking about CS's question earlier on, but other people might not have received that same scumread. I'm starting to realize that reads actually refer to the overall feelings (what I would have referred to as "overall" reads, like the culmination of reads).



As per request, today I'll be doing my ISO of Umbrage. In addition to just ISOing him, however, I'll also be paying special attention to his case against Snake. Since this is an ISO, I'll already mark a disclaimer that my responses will be in the present tense even if Umbrage has given up on those points. I'm also going to try to avoid commenting on the parts of his posts that I've already responded to in earlier posts.

OK, so my vote on ConSpiracy is about as serious as you can get for page 1 reads. Xtoxm stands out as odd to me, he didn't random vote, he didn't really say hello or anything, he just answered the questions. I'm not saying it's scum or town, it just looks odd.

I know the xtoxm part of this post has been beaten to death already, so I'll let it slide since there's nothing new to be gained today by dredging that up. Still, this is the post where he confirmed that his vote on ConSpiracy was serious - for a page 1 read.

OK, that makes sense.

UNVOTE: ConSpiracy

VOTE: Snake Eyes

This came right after CS explained his reasoning behind asking the question. I still think Umbrage let up a little too easily in this post, especially compared to how he acts arguing with the reasoning of other people later on.

When I voted ConSpiracy, I made sure to let everyone know it was a serious vote. I was setting myself up as bait, and you bit.

I've already gone over the rest of the post this quote comes from, but I just wanted to see if I could clarify something here. In the first Umbrage quote in this post, he said that his overall read on ConSpiracy was as serious as a page one read could be, implying that page one reads are never really serious (compared to reads formed later on in the game). I can understand that, especially since here he claims that the vote on CS was just bait.

@Umbrage, for clarity's sake, was the vote on ConSpiracy a serious vote? Was it purely bait? Or was it some combination of the two?

ConSpiracy has already said he was pushing a wagon with this vote. You've already acknowledged that it made sense that this was a wagon push, so it's not a "random vote."

Yes, but that wasn't clear at the time. CS only revealed it was a test later on.

This was in response to Umbrage's claim that Snake's wagon wasn't legitimate because it was a collection of random votes. I pointed out that one of the votes on Umbrage was legitimate before Snake jumped on, and he retorts with the fact that CS didn't reveal that until later. I'm just noticing this on this readthrough, but the same argument could be made against ConSpiracy's wagon on Umbrage; the only two votes on Umbrage at the beginning before CS tried wagoning were RVS votes.

@Umbrage, why did you forgive CS for his wagon so easily yet continue to attack Snake for the same thing when the first wagon was arguably being pushed even less than the second one was?

You just made my point for me, Snake never thought there was something up with the question. As it turns out, there was something up with it, CS didn't want my POV on things, he wanted reactions and a bandwagon. So there WAS an ulterior motive! But Snake never even considered that.

This also confused me. I said I didn't think there was anything weird with CS's question either when you responded to this, so why did he only blame Snake for not thinking the question was suspicious?

The rest of this post is where Umbrage degenerated to capsrage and swearing, but I do want to point out that seeing Snake say he had a scumread (now knowing the correct definition of scumread) does set off an alarm in my head, though no more of an alarm than Umbrage not being able to decide if his vote on CS was serious or bait. Still, I want to get his input on that.

His next couple of posts fake-quote Vordark and then complain about the Krazy/Ythan thing. Both read pretty neutral to me, since I can't imagine town OR scum benefitting from the fake-quote and I'm sure everyone was thinking the same thing about Krazy and Ythan.

Most of the next post was directly to me and I responded in kind, but this last bit caught my eye:

If you voted for me to get reactions, why didn't you initially get that I did the same with my vote for you? And why did you unvote that easily when I told the reason for my vote? It just doesn't really add up.

I unvoted because I believed you. I had no reason to disbelieve you. I suppose I should've picked up on your attempt to get reactions, but somehow I didn't think of that.

I would think that asking Umbrage a question that Umbrage felt was a set-up to make him look bad would have been a reason to disbelieve ConSpiracy.

If the majority didn't think it was scummy, then why are you singling out Snake for not trying to figure out the reasoning behind the question? I didn't try to find any reason for it. Neither did Krazy. Nor iamausername. So why focus on Snake on this point?

Because you didn't care either way. You weren't concerned, it had nothing to do with you. Snake Eyes though, DEFENDED ConSpiracy. With no solid reasoning as to why he's town. He jumped straight into the middle of our debate.

I've glanced back at the beginning of page two and I'm not sure that the way Snake brought up the question was necessarily

scummy

, you're definitely right that he brought it up its scum-value when he had nothing to do with it.

Well, you couldn't decide on whether or not you voted for CS for a serious reason or if you voted for him just to bait people into defending him. You also can't decide on why you think CS asked you the question (if he had a make-you-look-bad motive, you wouldn't have dropped your case on him so easily). Still, it seems you flip-flopped a lot less than my memory has led me to believe, or else I'm just not noticing it in your ISO.

I already answered that. I didn't know why CS was asking me to give reads. I had three choices.

1: Say I didn't have any good reads, and look stupid, maybe even scummy.
2: Make up some weak page one reads and end up eating my words later in the game, looking scummy.
3: Call CS out as scum, get us out of RVS, and maybe catch some scum along the way.

I still think I made the right call.

This I don't really get either. He says that his case on CS (that he made on page 1) died out, but having bad page one reads would make him look scummy. Wouldn't the now-dead case be considered the same thing?

Thinking back, it does seem like a strange thing to do, but once I thought of it, I was blinded by my own cleverness and had to do it, if that makes sense. I just couldn't resist.

Much like Darth's confirmation bias, I have to admit that I know the feeling here.

Overall, I get the feeling that Umbrage isn't really scummy, but he's not incredibly town either. Slight town read on him. Everything past that last quote seems to be him mainly repeating the same arguments for people who haven't read them or didn't understand them, so I don't think I really need to get into any more detail on that. Going through his ISO has definitely made me a little more suspicious of Snake, but only a little more. I'll have to reserve my judgment until I really get onto the Snake ISO.

I have to agree with everyone that some of the less-active people really need to get into the game.

Preview Edit: You have GOT to be kidding me. Okay, next I'm going to respond to the last eight posts that were made when I started this thing.

[Vordark]

I'll give you post another, more thorough reading and just address the portions that addressed me for now.

Unvote: ConSpiracy
Vote: Umbrage

Right now I'm leaning town on Snake Eyes and ConSpiracy, neutral on Abelcain given the "act scummy" tactic use. Umbrage seems to be doing a lot of OMGUS voting and a whole lot of flipping out for a relatively painless page one, three-vote, get us out of RVS bandwagon. And the whole act scummy to see who bites thing is just silly. DarthYoshi's jumping on ConSpiracy and then Snake Eyes for "defending" him seems odd as well. And I think Krazy needs to focus on this game.

Vordark used a catch up post to determine his vote. The reasons were: OMGUS, the going out of the RVS and the bait thing. Although the reason for my vote was strange and scummy, the OMGUS is nothing. On top of that his catch up post has some contradictions and seems like a buddying post to me.

Can you show me where I said the reason for you vote was strange and scummy? I cannot see where you are getting this at all and given in that post I said you seemed more town to me at the time, your remark here seems very out of place. Also, can you show me where I contradict myself in the catch up post? Showing me what you consider "buddying" might be helpful as well.

Vordark

There is one big problem with him, his catch up post. The other things may seem town motivated, but I couldn't find much that made sence.

Can you show me anywhere I appear to have been unclear or did not back up my remarks with reason? I have posted a fair amount, so it should not be difficult to find something that does not make sense, as you believe makes up the bulk of my posts.

His "catch-up" post was buddying, buddying, buddying. All of the things he said were already mentioned in thread and he hasn't put anything at all for himself.

You say "buddying" three times. It would definitely be nice if you presented your reasoning for this. The latter sentence is almost certainly true. At that point, there was very little content in the thread. I am not surprised that others would make similar observations given the same, limited material.

For example:

17 - I don't like DarthYoshi's vote at all here. There's nothing inherently "sketch" about ConSpiracy's vote in #16. You might not find scum on page one, but getting people talking sooner rather than later is always a good thing.

So DarthYoshi's vote isn't good enough to let me talk? He didn't even think of this point, but he just blindly does what seems to be the flow of the game: My vote being right and all others being wrong.

This reply makes very little sense. Your vote being right and all others being wrong?

This is a lot of Krazy-baiting. Krazy has actually started to settle down and contribute something. DY's reply was unnecessary and I think anyone that really wanted to focus the town would have let Krazy's comments slide, or at least tried more to defuse the situation than to egg him on, which this appears to do. He drops a sentence as props on Krazy's hunting of the lurkers, but makes sure he explains that his vote is staying on Krazy because of his responses. I read that last sentence as encouraging Krazy to keep engaging.

To summarize: Some of what DY is critical of I actually read as pro-town (moving us out of RVS, looking for relationships between players), he spent too much time FoSing CS's bandwagon on Umbrage while saying CS gave no reason for it, appeared to backtrack on that in the same post he continued to defend it and looks like he's trying to keep the Krazy train running. I also don't like how he felt the need to tell us why he moved his vote off Umbrage when he voted for Krazy.

At first, the reason he posted why DY is scummy is awful. Town wouldn't unnecessary post? That is the worst reason ever to vote for someone. On top of that the other reasons are bad as well: - Again the mention of my vote being great, - Krazy train (lol Ozzy Osbourne) attack was useless and - DY didn't vote for Umbrage at all.

"Town wouldn't unnecessary post" is not the reason I put forth as to why I was at the time leaning scum on DY (whereas now I have concluded he is scum), nor did I say it was. You say my "other reasons are bad as well" but don't explain yourself. As for "DY didn't vote for Umbrage at all", you are correct and that was a mistake on my part. He had been voting you and overly-explained why he moved it.

DY asks rethorical if continuusly putting pressure on your suspect is scummy (which was on the list of scummy things), Vordark answers this way:

Again, this statement only works if we assume you have a town motive. An equally viable explanation for the events is that you are attempting to keep the Krazy train running as a distraction.

Lol, great answer. "I don't know wether you are scum or not so that is nothing." But you did find him scummy for it.

No, I did not find him scummy for this. I noted only that the manner in which he was defending himself amounted to nothing more than "I'm town, so I must not be doing what you say".

ConSpiracy's ISO is only eight posts long, the last of which looks a pre-flake. Hopefully he's able to catch up and lend us his thoughts now that the thread seems to have settled down a bit. To be sure, CS is a big null read to me. BW's on page one or two are common to roll out of RVS, so could be town or could be scum trying to look town. The people jumping on it, though, that's interesting to me.

Great post, only if you weren't bandwagoning yourself and not even looking at SE and Ythan yourself... Fake town points.

I do not feel the need to move my vote around as much as some other people. I have also since looked at Snake Eyes and will look at Ythan when time permits. I believe some people do not remember there are nearly two weeks left before the deadline.

VOTE: Xtoxm

FoS: Vordark

Most things about DarthYoshi were very null. There are very many circular arguments and most things aren't even scummy. If somebody can post a proper case of Darth I would like to read it, since in my eyes he is by far less scummy than most of the players. He seems like an easy mislynch.

I would like you to clarify and respond to the points I noted above.

[Snake Eyes]

@Snake Eyes: in post #191 you say:

Also, I think your assumption that there's scum on the wagon is a bit premature, as there's no way to know if Umbrage is town. I'd even say that given how scummy Umbrage looks, this wagon could have grown a lot faster, if Umbrage was actually town. It would be very easy for scum to add their votes to the Umbrage wagon, if he's town.

I’m not really following the argument you are making here. This seems loaded with WIFOM. Yes it’s easy for scum to add votes if Umbrage is flailtown. It’s also easy for scum to add votes if Umbrage is flailscum. I don’t see how this isn’t null, because it feels so circular.

Are you more or less inclined to think Umbrage is scum based off the speed of the wagon? Why?

I guess I'm just used to games starting with early, fast wagons, and it just felt a bit weird how long it took to get the first wagon going. In hindsight though the game had some lurkers in it, so I suppose the speed of the wagon is a null tell. Another thing I evidently failed to emphasize here is the possibility of Umbrage being scum, in which case, I'd disagree that there's much chance of scum being on the wagon. None of the wagonees seemed to be in any way uncertain of their vote or leave windows of suspicion open to other people, so they don't seem like bussing. If Umbrage is town, then anything goes.

I believe regfan asked for top 3 scumlist:

xtoxm: Can't really bring up anything new about him as he's posted so little, but I'll just reiterate that his vote on DY and the justitication for it coming after the vote is pretty awful. Some of the other things he's saying do give me slight townie vibes, but I'm still wary of him. Not a particularly strong scumread, admittedly. Somehow most people in this game are reading town to me to varying degrees.

Umbrage: I'm not going to bother listing all the reasons I'm suspicious of him as they're all there already, but here's a few new points I don't think I've mentioned.
1. He keeps calling me scum and posting misrepresentions I've already debunked long ago.
2. He is making no effort to scumhunt or convince people that I'm scum. How is anyone supposed to take his scumread on me seriously if he isn't even voting me?
3. On a non-scummy note, there's this post which makes me think he might be just a townie butthurt over being wagoned.
Overall, he still belongs on my scumlist, but he's no longer the top suspect.

DarthYoshi: Reading him in ISO, there's tons of scum motivation for his post history. First off, in post #3, all the questions are aimed in a way to cast suspicion on the people involved. There and in later posts he's very much keeping all his options open and not saying anything of who's scum, just pointing out anti-town behavior. There are tons of other points I agree with but am too tired to find right now from Vordark/Iamausername, but let's just say that I'm pretty sure this guy is scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: DarthYoshi

[implosion]

VC will be put here
Edit: posted it a few posts later by mistake, can't delete that, keeping it there.

[Umbrage]

This comment wouldn't be made if he was just trying to get out of the RVS. He states here that he found me scummy for my vote and not to provoke reactions. Also in the second quote he mentions that he really cares about not looking scummy. It is not really townish to think that way especially if that aren't the only things he could do.

1. Sure I found you scummy, for page one. I just wanted to know why you asked me that. I see no reason to disbelieve your answer.

2. I disagree, the way I see it, if I am seen as scummy, that will distract the town and force me to spend time defending myself. But we're arguing theory now.

This came right after CS explained his reasoning behind asking the question. I still think Umbrage let up a little too easily in this post, especially compared to how he acts arguing with the reasoning of other people later on

My only defence for this is that it was a page one read, and I saw no reason to disbelieve CS. I filed it away as a potentially scummy action of course, but as I didn't have enough to make a case, I let it drop for the meantime.

@Umbrage, for clarity's sake, was the vote on ConSpiracy a serious vote? Was it purely bait? Or was it some combination of the two?

I wanted to know why he asked the question to me. That's the way I scumhunt, I ask people questions, get reactions, and try and trip up the mafia. Even if I didn't want to pull the gambit, I would've questioned his motives. But I also wanted to move the game along, and a serious vote was the best way to do that.

So yeah, I'd say the vote was bait, but the reasoning behind it was serious.

@Umbrage, why did you forgive CS for his wagon so easily yet continue to attack Snake for the same thing when the first wagon was arguably being pushed even less than the second one was?

The reason I found Snake's wagon bad was because there was a better wagon available: CS'. I don't recall CS having that luxury. You make an interesting point though, I'll have to check on that.

I said I didn't think there was anything weird with CS's question either when you responded to this, so why did he only blame Snake for not thinking the question was suspicious?

It's fine to disagree with me. But attacking me because you disagree with me, when the motives for that attack aren't clear, that's scummy.

I would think that asking Umbrage a question that Umbrage felt was a set-up to make him look bad would have been a reason to disbelieve ConSpiracy.

Sure, it could've been a set-up. But I can't prove it, so I don't really see the point in speculation.

This I don't really get either. He says that his case on CS (that he made on page 1) died out, but having bad page one reads would make him look scummy. Wouldn't the now-dead case be considered the same thing?

Maybe, but at least there're my honest thoughts. I didn't want to say player X looks scummy on page one because it would feel like lying. And then I'd have to come up with reasons as to why X is scummy. Whereas I didn't need to lie for my case against CS.

@ Snake Eyes: I'm asking one more time: why did you find CS to be town at the start of the game?

[Regfan]

I'll read over and reply in regards to the posts since my last one later tonight but for now I think we may have an effectively auto-win position. I know a great deal of mafiascum players despise speculating about the setup and claiming but I think doing so right now is our best bet.

Considering there's 9 town vs 3 mafia the days should progress as follows:

D1: 9 v 3 (End of, 8 v 3)
N2: 8 v 3 (End of 7 v 3)
D2: 7 v 3 (End of 6 v 3)
N3 6 v 3 (End of 5 v 3)
D4: Would be lylo.

This means that we have 2 msylnches + 1 no lynch opportunity. However, if tracker/vig chooses to be vig instead of tracker what it gives us is 2 Mslynches + 1 Vig shot.

With two mslynches it's highly unlikely that mafia will counter-claim a town power role meaning we should be able to attain 4 clears from mass-claiming. Assume that this is the case (Which I think it highly likely is), then there will be 8 VT claims, 3 being mafia 5 being town.

The only way we'd be able to lose is if we lynch/vig-shoot 4/5. Meaning just pure-odds wise we'd havea 60% chance of success ignoring scum-hunting and PR's night-actions added to it.

Therefore I would emphasis my recommendation that tracker/vig picks vig tonight and that we should mass-claim right now

[Umbrage]

I'll read over and reply in regards to the posts since my last one later tonight but for now I think we may have an effectively auto-win position. I know a great deal of mafiascum players despise speculating about the setup and claiming but I think doing so right now is our best bet.

Considering there's 9 town vs 3 mafia the days should progress as follows:

D1: 9 v 3 (End of, 8 v 3)
N2: 8 v 3 (End of 7 v 3)
D2: 7 v 3 (End of 6 v 3)
N3 6 v 3 (End of 5 v 3)
D4: Would be lylo.

This means that we have 2 msylnches + 1 no lynch opportunity. However, if tracker/vig chooses to be vig instead of tracker what it gives us is 2 Mslynches + 1 Vig shot.

With two mslynches it's highly unlikely that mafia will counter-claim a town power role meaning we should be able to attain 4 clears from mass-claiming. Assume that this is the case (Which I think it highly likely is), then there will be 8 VT claims, 3 being mafia 5 being town.

The only way we'd be able to lose is if we lynch/vig-shoot 4/5. Meaning just pure-odds wise we'd havea 60% chance of success ignoring scum-hunting and PR's night-actions added to it.

Therefore I would emphasis my recommendation that tracker/vig picks vig tonight and that we should mass-claim right now

YES LET'S LET THE SCUM KNOW NOT JUST WHAT POWER ROLES THERE ARE BUT WHO THEY ARE SO THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHO TO KILL. THAT IS A GREAT IDEA.

Or, we could focus on finding who the scum are, as opposed to the power roles.

Yeah, I like that idea better.

VOTE: Regfan

[implosion]

Vote count 1.6:

Xtoxm - 2 (DarthYoshi, ConSpiracy)
Krazy - 0
Umbrage - 1 (Ythan)
Ythan - 0
ConSpiracy - 1 (Krazy)
Regfan - 1 (Umbrage)
Snake Eyes - 0
Vordark - 0
Quaroath - 0
Abelcain - 0
iamausername - 1 (Regfan)
DarthYoshi - 4 (iamausername, Vordark, Xtoxm, Snake Eyes)
No lynch - 0
Not voting: Abelcain, Quaroath.

With 12 alive, 7 votes are required to lynch.

Prods: none.

Deadline is 8:30 EST on March 23.

[Regfan]

A) Clearly mafia already know what PR's are in the game except for once meaning that knowledge won't be news to them
B) Sure, it might give them kill-targets but it also means we can redirect scum-hunting away from scummy pr's.
C) You clearly haven't read the idea, by following it we have a 60% chance at winning, then you can add the PR's night actions on top of that as well as the effect of scumhunting to see that by doing this we gain a massive advantage.

[Umbrage]

If that is a valid plan, this is a totally broken set-up. Since I do not believe this is a totally broken set-up, because it would have to have been seen by countless mods and players, this is not a valid plan.

[Regfan]

The setup is indeed broken, and I think my posts proves that. Just because the setups broken via playing the optimal tactic of it doesn't we shouldn't play the optimal tactic of it. Thus as previously stated I think mass-claim is needed. If anyone disagrees I'll give you 1-2 days to do so otherwise I'll begin it.

[Krazy]

Isn't optimal play in that case for the mafia to cross-claim a power role? Why wouldn't they? They need the extra mislynch and the last mafia would have more room to breathe among the non-PRs.

[Regfan]

Assume they do counter-claim a power-role then we have direction for todays lynch (Being we know one of two people are mafia) and even in worst case that we lynch wrong we have a guarenteed mafia for tommorow.

[Krazy]

Yeah but isn't our end-game at that point not auto-win?

That's a real question, I haven't really done the maths, but that is my assumption at the moment.

[Krazy]

In which case the scum will have to claim detective or psychologist. Hider-tracker and hider are cross-confirming, vigilante would just shoot his CC, and tracker would be confirmable.

So yeah, figure out if it is still-auto-win if the scum claim detective/psychologist, and then we will know for sure.

[Krazy]

Assuming worst case scenario

-where the tracker is a tracker instead of a vig
-where we lynch the real detective day 1:

NOW - 9:3

D1 - lynch real cop; night tracker is worthless because obviously kill is coming from fake cop; fake cop kills real tracker.
7:3
D2 - lynch fake cop; night hider tracker dies
6:2
D3 - lynch VT; night kill VT; let's even say the hider somehow got himself killed too by hiding behind wrong person.
3:2
D4 Town is now lylo vs. 2 mafs with no power roles. This I believe is the absolute worst case scenario with a full role reveal.

So for "autowin" to be true:
-We must be sure the tracker/vig is a vig, not a tracker.
-hider has to not be too risky (which might mean not hiding?). Honestly at this point there's nowhere for the hider to hide safely

And again, once you add in one scum from the three-man team claiming detective, it just becomes a real mess real fast. Because we HAVE to lynch between cop claims immediately, because otherwise the fake cop will just keep doing the night kills thus rendering the real cop useless.

[Regfan]

So the very very worst case scenario is a 5 way lylo? Whereas the likelyhood is a near-autowin, personally I think it's the way to go, I'd love to hear some more opinions on the matter though.

[iamausername]

effectively auto-win position.

60% chance of success

I found your problem.

[Regfan]

Iamusername, as previously stated that's without the possibilty of power-roles clearing or confirming players. I consider that to be great pure-odds of winning.

[iamausername]

Iamusername, as previously stated that's without the possibilty of power-roles clearing or confirming players. I consider that to be great pure-odds of winning.

Don't just say "then the power roles can do the rest". Prove it. Run through the night actions and show me how this will be autowin.

[Xtoxm]

I don't think a massclaim day one strategy is feasible, due to the complete absence of any kind of protective role. There are enough vanilla townies in the game (5) that all the mafia could simply claim VT and then pick off the claimed power roles, and potentially leave us with very little information from night actions. I think we should wait at least until day two. The only down side to not massclaiming today, I think, is the vig potentially killing a town power role, which would be pretty catastrophic.

[Krazy]

There's also the minor point that a massclaim game would probably be exceedingly dull until the very end.

[Regfan]

"Don't just say "then the power roles can do the rest". Prove it. Run through the night actions and show me how this will be autowin."

Will do.

I'll go through it assuming mafia all claim VT and then I'll go through it assuming 1 mafia claims detective/psychologist.

All VT Claims: 4 Clears. 8 Unclears, 3 Mafia. Then lets assume that town manage to lynch town before mafia in every give scenario

D1. Town lynch VT claim #1 (8 v 3)

N1. Vig shoots VT claim #2. (7 v 3)
Mafia will be forced to kill detective/psychologist, (6 v 3)
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Hider hides behind a VT claim #3. Hider dies, VT #3 is confirmed mafia,VT claim #3 is cleared. (5 v 3)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. Hider hides behind a VT claim #3. Hider lives, VT #3 is cleared town. (6 v 3)

D2. Two scenarios:
.
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Town lynch confirmed mafia (VT #3). (5 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. VT #3 is cleared, town lynch VT #4. (5 v 3)

N2:
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Mafia shoot Vig/Other Torn PR (4 v 2) Vig shoots VT #4 (3 v 2)
Two scenarios: Scenario #2. Mafia shoot Vig/Other Town PR. (4 v 3) Vig no shoots due to lose if wrong. Hider no hides. (4 v 3)

D3:
Two scenarios: Scenario #1. Lylo: VT #5, VT #6, VT #7, VT #8 alive. 5 Alive. 4 Unclears. 2 Are mafia. 2/4 Chance + 1/3 chance to lynch mafia the mafia that day and the next day
Two scenarios: Scenario #2 4 v 3. Alive = VT #5. VT #6. VT #7. VT #8. 7 Alive. 4 Unclears. 3 Are mafia. 3/4 Chance + 2/3 chance + 1/3 chance to lynch mafia that day and the following two days.

[Regfan]

Therefore in scenario 1 we are able to lynch VT #1, VT #2, VT #3, VT #4 and VT #5 before game loss is over. Meaning the only way to lose would be via lynching every VT in the game.

Therefore in scenario 2 we are able to lynch VT #1, VT #2, VT #4, VT #5 before losing with VT #3 being clear, so again the only way to lose would be to lynch every VT in the game.

Therefore assuming all mafia claim VT we have an 80% chance to win just by random-lynching in the VT Claims (Which we wouldn't random, we'd scumhunt thus increasing the odds further).

I'll go into what happens if they claim detective/psychologist later tonight, got to watch a movie first.

[ConSpiracy]

I am not in favour of the tracker/vig choose the vig. In my previous experience of vigs they only shoot townies. The vig must be damn sure about himself to choose vig.
Keep in mind that the tracker can confirm some townies: hider/cop/hider-tracker. Isn't that better than the possibility of shooting townies?

Regfan, you totally forgot the hider-tracker in your list thingie.

Vordark, I will get to you either today or tomorrow.