I'm spoilering this because I imagine some people don't really want to wade through more setup talk. Anyway, I've thought about it some more, and I still think that's it's reasonably balanced, but not without flaws. It definitely leans a bit on the townsided side of things, but not overtly so.
I think there are two fundamental issues or flaws with this setup. The first is that there are a high number of roles that are "town by claim". The vig, doc, masons, and the Supersaint Enabler (after the Supersaint flips) are all roles that basically aren't likely to be doubted after they claim. This can lead to scum being frustrated even when they kill PR after PR because it essentially means they are boxed into killing these people and not who they want. I think this is a design issue more than a balance issue, but it is true that one has to be careful about having too many of these kinds of roles in a non-role madness game. I had this issue in a game that I tried to run once (see
here), but thankfully, my reviewers were well aware of this issue. Notably, that just as adding mafia makes the setup exponentially more scumsided, the same is true for town when adding more confirmed townies. With pseudo-confirmed-town-by-claiming roles, it's a lesser issue but still one to think about. Now, in the setup I linked, it was kind of overt, but the same principle applies; you don't want to give town top many roles that will in essence force the mafia's hand.
Now, the other main flaw with the setup is the Supersaint Enabler. As I stated earlier, I do think the Supersaint changes up the game enough where town probably should have some kind of indicator that it exists. That indicator doesn't necessarily have to be at the beginning of the game, but at the same time, it can't come too late. The main issue here though, and it relates back to my first observation, is that by making the Supersaint Enabler a separate role, it is basically free information for the town, AND likely leads to the role being seen as town, especially when it's known that scum chose their roles. (Why would scum /EVER/ pick Supersaint Enabler as one of their roles, especially with an actual Supersaint?) Thus, the way to solve this (at least imo) is to tie the information to a role that doesn't want to attract a night kill. In this setup, that means either the vig or the doctor should have the info/role tacked on.
So with all that said, I think a more balanced (and less frustrating setup for scum) would probably look something like this:
3x Town Mason + Town 3-Shot Vigilante Supersaint Enabler + Town Roaming Doctor + Town Strong-Willed Disloyal Simple Vanilla Cop + 7x VTs versus Mafia Ascetic Multitasking Alien + Mafia Supersaint + 2x Mafia Goon
Putting the enabler on the vig means that the vig has to weigh outing the info (and attracting the night kill) versus keeping it quiet and having town risk triggering the Supersaint. It also serves as a swing reducer in that if the vig dies early (as most of the game's power is in the masons and the vigilante), scum loses one of their powers as a tradeoff. 3-Shot Vigilante also seems to me like the proper amount; full vigilante would be too much (as it proved here) whereas one or two shot is far too few (as town doesn't have much power elsewhere). 3 or 4 shots seems about the right number; I went with 3 here because the current trend is to lean a bit more scumsided than townsided. The informed townie was dropped because in a setup where there is already a strong mason bloc, it's probably better not to give town too many extra roles (even if they are alignment neutral) just to ensure you don't run into the first issue I mentioned.
One other note: I said it before, but I would like to repeat it: the cigilante played very well here even despite the fact that what has happened might make you think otherwise. A good vigilante shoots players that are liabilities to the town win condition; by shooting two such liabilities this game, we (the town) gained a mislim that would've otherwise been wasted on one of those two. Context is very important in evaluating the quality of a vigilante's shots.
Idk who posted this but twasn’t me. Yeah overly dramatic posts from you like Murder quoted: 
