In post 2639, mastina wrote:Oh forgot to mention, Fire claim still scum regardless of tracker or tracker type action as it fulfills the same role on a scumteam: weak investigative role which doesn’t give too much info, is still useful to the scum, yet works as plausibly town.
Also on that note, guaranteed scum in Titus/fire and pikely both, for one reason:
How many investigative roles do you think we have?
We've got the dead, me, Ydrasse, Titus, and fire all as having investigative actions.
Also Also, if scum had a roleblocker, why would they block me and kill Vivax, rather than just block Vivax?
Yes, I get it, Vivax proven vig and townread and was wildcard. But part of that wildcard status was that he could shoot N2.
Why block me when blocking Vivax was safer?
The best answers I have are that they had protection against Vivax (rolestopper--which could in fact mean that I double failed, checking their roles topped scumbuddy while also being roleblocked), or that they DID block Vivax, or that they didn't have a roleblocker.
Roleblocking me and leaving the wildcard vig free to potentially shoot is suboptimal.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:41 pm
by Lukewarm
Timeline of Titus's claim, and it shifting to fit the result on her.
Ydra "softs" having a guilty on Titus, and heavily implies she is a Traffic Analyst that got a result that Titus is in a hood.
In post 2331, Ydrasse wrote:i have a role where i can check to see if people have pts(EXCEPT THE MAFIA PT) and join them if they do
titus doesn’t have any pts
I am waiting for the mod. Technically accurate. I had a conditional action to masonize mastina if no one visited her. It resolves last in nar.
Furtive and myself (maybe others who knows) ask why she original claimed she had a partner who she was hiding, if she knew from her role pm that failure was an option for her role, and there was also a lack of PT.
Titus responds that really she just meant that she crumbed her Target, not her Currently Confirmed Mason Partner. *Totally Normal Mafia Things*
maybe it was supposed to be another claim originally
In case I died. I am loyal.
------
But here is the thing.
Her "conditional" part of her ability is a plausible way out of this situation if she is a scum who role blocked Mastina, and knew mastina was getting ready to reveal that she was roleblocked
This makes this series of posts make way more sense btw -- She was not waiting for the mod to tell her if her ability worked. She was waiting for mastina to tell us that she had been roleblocked, so she can be like "OHHHHH, THATS WHY WE DID NOT GET A PT"
In post 2411, Something_Smart wrote:If he's on mobile I can see him having trouble adding to PT's right away, even if he can answer questions. But he should be able to tell Titus the action succeeded.
No. I could have "succeeded" but no pt be made because of my conditions. Datisi cannot tell me.
In post 2416, Titus wrote:No. I could have "succeeded" but no pt be made because of my conditions. Datisi cannot tell me.
Oh I was assuming that would be considered failure. Ask him if he's going to make you a PT, he should be able to tell you that at least.
Fair. I'll do that.
[quote="In
Because,
"The mod said I get a PT if my ability succeeded, I don't get a PT if it fails, the day started, but I didn't get a PT, and i still started posting today under the assumption that it succeeded, but also the mod didn't/can't/won't tell me if my ability succeeded or not, and so I am just *waiting* -- indefinitely I guess -- for the mod to just open up the PT (because again, the only out come I am considering currently is that the mod must be too busy to open the PT for my ability that totally succeeded, and not ruminating on the fact that apparently my ability failed)"
Makes no god damn sense.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:46 pm
by Lukewarm
I had fun writing that, and I hope everyone chuckles to themselves as they read it, and then vote for Titus.
Thank you, and your welcome.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:48 pm
by PenguinPower
i mean - thanks for all of the words - but the role itself doesn't make sense...both weak and loyal modifiers on a conditional masonizer with 150% productivity requirement? meh.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:48 pm
by PenguinPower
my vote is on titus in spirit but i don't wanna anger the jjh gods.
In post 2655, PenguinPower wrote:my vote is on titus in spirit but i don't wanna anger the jjh gods.
Would it change your mind to know that I tried out, not 1, not 2, not 3, but FOUR different colors for my "oopsie, forgot to mention that when I claimed." before I settled on orange?
In post 2634, furtiveglance wrote:I have returned, it seems that Titus is neither clear nor outted, right? Or are they outted?
Neither clear nor outed but the same people parking me from yesterday are parking me today.
This is fairly unrelated, but I laughed out loud at the way Titus said this with a straight face, and then quote a vote count where 3 of her 5 voters are dead townies.
.
~ closed setup.
~ while the setup does not meet normal guidelines, it is non-bastard, and none of the roles are overly complex.
~ players are not able to multitask unless otherwise specified, with one exception: if a non-town player has the ability to use more than one kill in the same night, the same player may carry out more than one kill.
~ non-town power roles function as normal.
~ using town power roles requires
productivity percentage points
; see below.
2. using town power roles:
~ during each day, each member of the town may choose how productive they're going to be at work that day, ranging from 0% to 100%.
~ if they do not submit anything, they will default to 100% productivity.
~ at the start of each night, each town member will gain [100% minus their productivity that day] productivity percentage points.
~ for example, if they were 75% productive on d1, they will gain 25% productivity percentage points at the start of n1.
~ in order to use their power role, they must have the needed number of productivity percentage points, as said in their role pm.
~ productivity percentage points do not have to be used immediately, and they do not disappear if not used immediately.
3. the average of town's productivity:
~ at the end of each day, the arithmetic average of all townies' productivity that day is calculated.
~ if the average is 75% or higher, nothing happens.
~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.
~ it is
not
publicly revealed what the town's average productivity is, or how many extra kills the mafia has that night.
~ the mafia will only know how many extra nightkills they have, if any; they will not be informed what the town's average productivity was.
4. sample town vanilla and town power role role pm:
Spoiler:
~ note: all town vanillas will receive the same role pm.
Okay so I'm dumb and explaining Rather than working, but I have the wording now, so don't wanna risk losing it later.
BASICALLY:
21? (Too lazy to check if this is the number of players, but I think so?) Players with 4 scum as mountainous is scumsided.
You might wonder how, but keep in mind that if I recall correctly, 11:2 is the balance metric for mountainous.
Double the scum to 4, and you need Double the town, plus or minus 1: 21 or 23 town, to keep it on odds. (Yes, mountainous might not directly scale, but I'm doing loose mental math here. Point is, there's not enough town for it to be balanced as a mountainous.)
What that means is,
THE NET TOTAL SUM VALUE OF THE TOWN ROLES IN THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE MOUNTAINOUS STANDARD:
Any and every boon that the scum has, needs to be weaker than the town's boons. The strength of the extra scum kills and the strength of the scum roles needs to still add up to a sum total LESS than the sum total value of the town's roles.
If we treat mountainous 4 scum as value 0, then scum kills are negative, and scum power roles are also negative. Town's roles having nerfs isn't negative so much as divisive, or if you prefer, multiplicative by a fraction value.
Because a value of 0 is scumsided, the value needs to move notably to the positive, say by +20 (numbers arbitrary).
So, what value does this mean?
Enter, the percentage nerfs.
Percentage has an obvious nerf, in enabling the scum extra kills. This is, loosely, a positive being counterbalanced by a negative. If the town roles all act, it'd be, say, a +20 to a -15-30: loosely breaking even, and being either slightly beneficial to the scum -20++) or town (-15).
The roles are thus naturally counterbalanced by the extra kills, bringing the sum total close to 0. As a reminder, it needs to be significantly higher than 0.
However, there's a SECOND nerf for every power role:
Any with stacking percentages will eventually exceed 100%, and any role exceeding 100% cannot fire every night.
THE MORE ANY POWER ROLE IS USED, THE LESS OFTEN IT CAN BE USED.
This further reduces the value of each PR, effectively making them take a minimum of two days to fire--more, if desiring to limit scum kills.
And then,
THE MORE TOWN ROLES THERE ARE, THE MORE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR USING THEM GROW.
Which means extra punishment dropping the value even further, as this game is quite obviously PR heavy.
Evert town role (except Roden's, which is why I thought it bullshit) has consequences for being used, dropping the points value for the sum total which needs to be notably above 0.
Which means that you'd expect the roles to be strong, right???
...Except their strength is heavily gated. One-shot cop, not full cop.
THE TOWN'S ROLES GATES MEAN THAT THEY ARE TOO WEAK FOR SCUM TO HAVE STRONG ROLES.
Because the town's roles have gates in the form of modifiers, high percentage costs that grow, etc., that means EVEN IN A HEAVILY PR CENTRIC GAME, the scum CANNOT have strong roles, else the sum total is at 0 or even negative, when it needs to be above positive by some margin.
Thus, the scum roles must be fairly weak.
Irchers role to give a conformable role.
A rolestopper or ascetic for some defensive power that doesn't stop all of the town's strength.
An action investigation role that isn't a rolecop, but still gives them info.
And a Goon.
.
~ closed setup.
~ while the setup does not meet normal guidelines, it is non-bastard, and none of the roles are overly complex.
~ players are not able to multitask unless otherwise specified, with one exception: if a non-town player has the ability to use more than one kill in the same night, the same player may carry out more than one kill.
~ non-town power roles function as normal.
~ using town power roles requires
productivity percentage points
; see below.
2. using town power roles:
~ during each day, each member of the town may choose how productive they're going to be at work that day, ranging from 0% to 100%.
~ if they do not submit anything, they will default to 100% productivity.
~ at the start of each night, each town member will gain [100% minus their productivity that day] productivity percentage points.
~ for example, if they were 75% productive on d1, they will gain 25% productivity percentage points at the start of n1.
~ in order to use their power role, they must have the needed number of productivity percentage points, as said in their role pm.
~ productivity percentage points do not have to be used immediately, and they do not disappear if not used immediately.
3. the average of town's productivity:
~ at the end of each day, the arithmetic average of all townies' productivity that day is calculated.
~ if the average is 75% or higher, nothing happens.
~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.
~ it is
not
publicly revealed what the town's average productivity is, or how many extra kills the mafia has that night.
~ the mafia will only know how many extra nightkills they have, if any; they will not be informed what the town's average productivity was.
4. sample town vanilla and town power role role pm:
Spoiler:
~ note: all town vanillas will receive the same role pm.
Okay so I'm dumb and explaining Rather than working, but I have the wording now, so don't wanna risk losing it later.
BASICALLY:
21? (Too lazy to check if this is the number of players, but I think so?) Players with 4 scum as mountainous is scumsided.
You might wonder how, but keep in mind that if I recall correctly, 11:2 is the balance metric for mountainous.
Double the scum to 4, and you need Double the town, plus or minus 1: 21 or 23 town, to keep it on odds. (Yes, mountainous might not directly scale, but I'm doing loose mental math here. Point is, there's not enough town for it to be balanced as a mountainous.)
What that means is,
THE NET TOTAL SUM VALUE OF THE TOWN ROLES IN THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE MOUNTAINOUS STANDARD:
Any and every boon that the scum has, needs to be weaker than the town's boons. The strength of the extra scum kills and the strength of the scum roles needs to still add up to a sum total LESS than the sum total value of the town's roles.
If we treat mountainous 4 scum as value 0, then scum kills are negative, and scum power roles are also negative. Town's roles having nerfs isn't negative so much as divisive, or if you prefer, multiplicative by a fraction value.
Because a value of 0 is scumsided, the value needs to move notably to the positive, say by +20 (numbers arbitrary).
So, what value does this mean?
Enter, the percentage nerfs.
Percentage has an obvious nerf, in enabling the scum extra kills. This is, loosely, a positive being counterbalanced by a negative. If the town roles all act, it'd be, say, a +20 to a -15-30: loosely breaking even, and being either slightly beneficial to the scum -20++) or town (-15).
The roles are thus naturally counterbalanced by the extra kills, bringing the sum total close to 0. As a reminder, it needs to be significantly higher than 0.
However, there's a SECOND nerf for every power role:
Any with stacking percentages will eventually exceed 100%, and any role exceeding 100% cannot fire every night.
THE MORE ANY POWER ROLE IS USED, THE LESS OFTEN IT CAN BE USED.
This further reduces the value of each PR, effectively making them take a minimum of two days to fire--more, if desiring to limit scum kills.
And then,
THE MORE TOWN ROLES THERE ARE, THE MORE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR USING THEM GROW.
Which means extra punishment dropping the value even further, as this game is quite obviously PR heavy.
Evert town role (except Roden's, which is why I thought it bullshit) has consequences for being used, dropping the points value for the sum total which needs to be notably above 0.
Which means that you'd expect the roles to be strong, right???
...Except their strength is heavily gated. One-shot cop, not full cop.
THE TOWN'S ROLES GATES MEAN THAT THEY ARE TOO WEAK FOR SCUM TO HAVE STRONG ROLES.
Because the town's roles have gates in the form of modifiers, high percentage costs that grow, etc., that means EVEN IN A HEAVILY PR CENTRIC GAME, the scum CANNOT have strong roles, else the sum total is at 0 or even negative, when it needs to be above positive by some margin.
Thus, the scum roles must be fairly weak.
Irchers role to give a conformable role.
A rolestopper or ascetic for some defensive power that doesn't stop all of the town's strength.
An action investigation role that isn't a rolecop, but still gives them info.
And a Goon.
Is a balanced scumteam.
(Outta time.)
(NOTE: Percentage means that town's holstering is dividing town's ++strength to be less; town blasting is multiplying scums' --effect to be greater.)
I realize that this is a theme game with theme mechanics/roles, but the formatting of roles/results/etc. Means that Datisi is clearly channeling his NRG experience.
What this means is that this game in many ways works as a scaled up Mini: 1 extra scum, to 9 extra town acting as a buffer for the extra scum kills.
The balance standard for a mini:
3-4 moderately strong tprs vs 0-1 weak scum prs. Datisi likes his scum prs, which bumps the total up to 4-6 fairly strong tprs vs. 2-3 scum prs. Or, if the town roles aren't all that strong, more like 8 or so tprs of weaker strength.
A popular default scum role combo:
1 interference role (roleblocker strong, ascetic/rolestopper mid),
1 investigative (rolecop strong, tracker type mid),
1 goon or worthless eg messenger role.
Scaled up, you get either 2 messengers (what I thought) or q messenger 1 goon.
And for the town, double the ~8 to ~12-16 tprs.
But the scum can't have the strongest versions of their roles, because they are too strong as-is.
.
~ closed setup.
~ while the setup does not meet normal guidelines, it is non-bastard, and none of the roles are overly complex.
~ players are not able to multitask unless otherwise specified, with one exception: if a non-town player has the ability to use more than one kill in the same night, the same player may carry out more than one kill.
~ non-town power roles function as normal.
~ using town power roles requires
productivity percentage points
; see below.
2. using town power roles:
~ during each day, each member of the town may choose how productive they're going to be at work that day, ranging from 0% to 100%.
~ if they do not submit anything, they will default to 100% productivity.
~ at the start of each night, each town member will gain [100% minus their productivity that day] productivity percentage points.
~ for example, if they were 75% productive on d1, they will gain 25% productivity percentage points at the start of n1.
~ in order to use their power role, they must have the needed number of productivity percentage points, as said in their role pm.
~ productivity percentage points do not have to be used immediately, and they do not disappear if not used immediately.
3. the average of town's productivity:
~ at the end of each day, the arithmetic average of all townies' productivity that day is calculated.
~ if the average is 75% or higher, nothing happens.
~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.
~ it is
not
publicly revealed what the town's average productivity is, or how many extra kills the mafia has that night.
~ the mafia will only know how many extra nightkills they have, if any; they will not be informed what the town's average productivity was.
4. sample town vanilla and town power role role pm:
Spoiler:
~ note: all town vanillas will receive the same role pm.
Okay so I'm dumb and explaining Rather than working, but I have the wording now, so don't wanna risk losing it later.
BASICALLY:
21? (Too lazy to check if this is the number of players, but I think so?) Players with 4 scum as mountainous is scumsided.
You might wonder how, but keep in mind that if I recall correctly, 11:2 is the balance metric for mountainous.
Double the scum to 4, and you need Double the town, plus or minus 1: 21 or 23 town, to keep it on odds. (Yes, mountainous might not directly scale, but I'm doing loose mental math here. Point is, there's not enough town for it to be balanced as a mountainous.)
What that means is,
THE NET TOTAL SUM VALUE OF THE TOWN ROLES IN THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE MOUNTAINOUS STANDARD:
Any and every boon that the scum has, needs to be weaker than the town's boons. The strength of the extra scum kills and the strength of the scum roles needs to still add up to a sum total LESS than the sum total value of the town's roles.
If we treat mountainous 4 scum as value 0, then scum kills are negative, and scum power roles are also negative. Town's roles having nerfs isn't negative so much as divisive, or if you prefer, multiplicative by a fraction value.
Because a value of 0 is scumsided, the value needs to move notably to the positive, say by +20 (numbers arbitrary).
So, what value does this mean?
Enter, the percentage nerfs.
Percentage has an obvious nerf, in enabling the scum extra kills. This is, loosely, a positive being counterbalanced by a negative. If the town roles all act, it'd be, say, a +20 to a -15-30: loosely breaking even, and being either slightly beneficial to the scum -20++) or town (-15).
The roles are thus naturally counterbalanced by the extra kills, bringing the sum total close to 0. As a reminder, it needs to be significantly higher than 0.
However, there's a SECOND nerf for every power role:
Any with stacking percentages will eventually exceed 100%, and any role exceeding 100% cannot fire every night.
THE MORE ANY POWER ROLE IS USED, THE LESS OFTEN IT CAN BE USED.
This further reduces the value of each PR, effectively making them take a minimum of two days to fire--more, if desiring to limit scum kills.
And then,
THE MORE TOWN ROLES THERE ARE, THE MORE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR USING THEM GROW.
Which means extra punishment dropping the value even further, as this game is quite obviously PR heavy.
Evert town role (except Roden's, which is why I thought it bullshit) has consequences for being used, dropping the points value for the sum total which needs to be notably above 0.
Which means that you'd expect the roles to be strong, right???
...Except their strength is heavily gated. One-shot cop, not full cop.
THE TOWN'S ROLES GATES MEAN THAT THEY ARE TOO WEAK FOR SCUM TO HAVE STRONG ROLES.
Because the town's roles have gates in the form of modifiers, high percentage costs that grow, etc., that means EVEN IN A HEAVILY PR CENTRIC GAME, the scum CANNOT have strong roles, else the sum total is at 0 or even negative, when it needs to be above positive by some margin.
Thus, the scum roles must be fairly weak.
Irchers role to give a conformable role.
A rolestopper or ascetic for some defensive power that doesn't stop all of the town's strength.
An action investigation role that isn't a rolecop, but still gives them info.
And a Goon.
Is a balanced scumteam.
(Outta time.)
(NOTE: Percentage means that town's holstering is dividing town's ++strength to be less; town blasting is multiplying scums' --effect to be greater.)
I realize that this is a theme game with theme mechanics/roles, but the formatting of roles/results/etc. Means that Datisi is clearly channeling his NRG experience.
What this means is that this game in many ways works as a scaled up Mini: 1 extra scum, to 9 extra town acting as a buffer for the extra scum kills.
The balance standard for a mini:
3-4 moderately strong tprs vs 0-1 weak scum prs. Datisi likes his scum prs, which bumps the total up to 4-6 fairly strong tprs vs. 2-3 scum prs. Or, if the town roles aren't all that strong, more like 8 or so tprs of weaker strength.
A popular default scum role combo:
1 interference role (roleblocker strong, ascetic/rolestopper mid),
1 investigative (rolecop strong, tracker type mid),
1 goon or worthless eg messenger role.
Scaled up, you get either 2 messengers (what I thought) or q messenger 1 goon.
And for the town, double the ~8 to ~12-16 tprs.
But the scum can't have the strongest versions of their roles, because they are too strong as-is.
Basically, the percentage mechanic acts as a force multiplier for the scum, and/or a force nullifier for the town.
When the total sum needs to be notably above 0, the scum prs drag the amount too close or even below 0 if too strong.
The town power roles being gated by role gates and percentage costs, as well as fear of the extra kill leading to theoretically using less than the maximum, means that their ~12 tprs don't bump the total up nearly enough.
The scum even having the scum prs be notable drags the total arguably too low imo, but Datisi tends to have more of a scumsided setup lean if I recall correctly.
Yet even with that lean, full roleblockers/rolecops/etc. Is too much.
The scum roles need to be moderate to weak, to account for the town's roles being triple nerfed from their theoretical maximum potential.
And because Datisi likes those scum roles, he has them in their mid-powered format: rolestopper or ascetic,
And an action investigation role.
.
~ closed setup.
~ while the setup does not meet normal guidelines, it is non-bastard, and none of the roles are overly complex.
~ players are not able to multitask unless otherwise specified, with one exception: if a non-town player has the ability to use more than one kill in the same night, the same player may carry out more than one kill.
~ non-town power roles function as normal.
~ using town power roles requires
productivity percentage points
; see below.
2. using town power roles:
~ during each day, each member of the town may choose how productive they're going to be at work that day, ranging from 0% to 100%.
~ if they do not submit anything, they will default to 100% productivity.
~ at the start of each night, each town member will gain [100% minus their productivity that day] productivity percentage points.
~ for example, if they were 75% productive on d1, they will gain 25% productivity percentage points at the start of n1.
~ in order to use their power role, they must have the needed number of productivity percentage points, as said in their role pm.
~ productivity percentage points do not have to be used immediately, and they do not disappear if not used immediately.
3. the average of town's productivity:
~ at the end of each day, the arithmetic average of all townies' productivity that day is calculated.
~ if the average is 75% or higher, nothing happens.
~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.
~ it is
not
publicly revealed what the town's average productivity is, or how many extra kills the mafia has that night.
~ the mafia will only know how many extra nightkills they have, if any; they will not be informed what the town's average productivity was.
4. sample town vanilla and town power role role pm:
Spoiler:
~ note: all town vanillas will receive the same role pm.
Okay so I'm dumb and explaining Rather than working, but I have the wording now, so don't wanna risk losing it later.
BASICALLY:
21? (Too lazy to check if this is the number of players, but I think so?) Players with 4 scum as mountainous is scumsided.
You might wonder how, but keep in mind that if I recall correctly, 11:2 is the balance metric for mountainous.
Double the scum to 4, and you need Double the town, plus or minus 1: 21 or 23 town, to keep it on odds. (Yes, mountainous might not directly scale, but I'm doing loose mental math here. Point is, there's not enough town for it to be balanced as a mountainous.)
What that means is,
THE NET TOTAL SUM VALUE OF THE TOWN ROLES IN THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE MOUNTAINOUS STANDARD:
Any and every boon that the scum has, needs to be weaker than the town's boons. The strength of the extra scum kills and the strength of the scum roles needs to still add up to a sum total LESS than the sum total value of the town's roles.
If we treat mountainous 4 scum as value 0, then scum kills are negative, and scum power roles are also negative. Town's roles having nerfs isn't negative so much as divisive, or if you prefer, multiplicative by a fraction value.
Because a value of 0 is scumsided, the value needs to move notably to the positive, say by +20 (numbers arbitrary).
So, what value does this mean?
Enter, the percentage nerfs.
Percentage has an obvious nerf, in enabling the scum extra kills. This is, loosely, a positive being counterbalanced by a negative. If the town roles all act, it'd be, say, a +20 to a -15-30: loosely breaking even, and being either slightly beneficial to the scum -20++) or town (-15).
The roles are thus naturally counterbalanced by the extra kills, bringing the sum total close to 0. As a reminder, it needs to be significantly higher than 0.
However, there's a SECOND nerf for every power role:
Any with stacking percentages will eventually exceed 100%, and any role exceeding 100% cannot fire every night.
THE MORE ANY POWER ROLE IS USED, THE LESS OFTEN IT CAN BE USED.
This further reduces the value of each PR, effectively making them take a minimum of two days to fire--more, if desiring to limit scum kills.
And then,
THE MORE TOWN ROLES THERE ARE, THE MORE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR USING THEM GROW.
Which means extra punishment dropping the value even further, as this game is quite obviously PR heavy.
Evert town role (except Roden's, which is why I thought it bullshit) has consequences for being used, dropping the points value for the sum total which needs to be notably above 0.
Which means that you'd expect the roles to be strong, right???
...Except their strength is heavily gated. One-shot cop, not full cop.
THE TOWN'S ROLES GATES MEAN THAT THEY ARE TOO WEAK FOR SCUM TO HAVE STRONG ROLES.
Because the town's roles have gates in the form of modifiers, high percentage costs that grow, etc., that means EVEN IN A HEAVILY PR CENTRIC GAME, the scum CANNOT have strong roles, else the sum total is at 0 or even negative, when it needs to be above positive by some margin.
Thus, the scum roles must be fairly weak.
Irchers role to give a conformable role.
A rolestopper or ascetic for some defensive power that doesn't stop all of the town's strength.
An action investigation role that isn't a rolecop, but still gives them info.
And a Goon.
Is a balanced scumteam.
(Outta time.)
(NOTE: Percentage means that town's holstering is dividing town's ++strength to be less; town blasting is multiplying scums' --effect to be greater.)
I realize that this is a theme game with theme mechanics/roles, but the formatting of roles/results/etc. Means that Datisi is clearly channeling his NRG experience.
What this means is that this game in many ways works as a scaled up Mini: 1 extra scum, to 9 extra town acting as a buffer for the extra scum kills.
The balance standard for a mini:
3-4 moderately strong tprs vs 0-1 weak scum prs. Datisi likes his scum prs, which bumps the total up to 4-6 fairly strong tprs vs. 2-3 scum prs. Or, if the town roles aren't all that strong, more like 8 or so tprs of weaker strength.
A popular default scum role combo:
1 interference role (roleblocker strong, ascetic/rolestopper mid),
1 investigative (rolecop strong, tracker type mid),
1 goon or worthless eg messenger role.
Scaled up, you get either 2 messengers (what I thought) or q messenger 1 goon.
And for the town, double the ~8 to ~12-16 tprs.
But the scum can't have the strongest versions of their roles, because they are too strong as-is.
Basically, the percentage mechanic acts as a force multiplier for the scum, and/or a force nullifier for the town.
When the total sum needs to be notably above 0, the scum prs drag the amount too close or even below 0 if too strong.
The town power roles being gated by role gates and percentage costs, as well as fear of the extra kill leading to theoretically using less than the maximum, means that their ~12 tprs don't bump the total up nearly enough.
The scum even having the scum prs be notable drags the total arguably too low imo, but Datisi tends to have more of a scumsided setup lean if I recall correctly.
Yet even with that lean, full roleblockers/rolecops/etc. Is too much.
The scum roles need to be moderate to weak, to account for the town's roles being triple nerfed from their theoretical maximum potential.
And because Datisi likes those scum roles, he has them in their mid-powered format: rolestopper or ascetic,
And an action investigation role.
Now, there IS room for a HEAVILY GATED roleblocker, but it needs to be INCREDIBLY gated.
We're talking, one-shot or MAYBE 2x. (But let's be real, if my memory of Datisi scumsiding setups by default is true, it's 2x. But not 3x or more, even Datisi wouldn't do that.)
So why am I so adamant that it's doubtful that I was roleblocked?
...Because:
LAST NIGHT, THE SCUM KNEW THAT TOWN PRODUCTIVITY DROPPED BELOW 75%.
They had an extra kill.
Because they knew that they had an extra kill, they could estimate how much percentage that the town used: enough to be below 75%, but above 50%.
I had publicly stated I was using 50%, which gave the scum an extra insight into estimating the percentage used. And the conclusion:
THE SCUM KNEW THAT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PRODUCTIVITY WAS MISSING, AND THAT THEREFORE THE TOWN HAD SOME HUGE PERCENTAGE NOT HOLSTERED.
So, if the town had enough not holstered to give the scum a second kill, with them knowing my percentage, they could deduce about how much was missing--and know that by the math, it was A LOT.
Say...enough for a second vig shot from Vivax?
He theoretically could, too! He said he was holstering, but the scum knew that SOMEONE used enough to trigger a second kill. (Or multiple people used a bit which added up.)
Vivax yesterday was, explicitly, a wildcard.
What he said he'd do, what stances he said he had, everything was constantly changing.
So when the scum got a second kill, it wouldn't be too far a logical leap to conclude that Vivax had another shot prepped.
Why, then, would the scum use ONE OF THEIR ONLY SHOTS on ME, rather than blocking THE CLAIMED VIG WHO LIKELY LIED ABOUT HOLSTERING? (Okay, so I'm not sure Vivax did, but from a scum perspective, it SHOULD have looked like he lied about holstering.)
More than that:
With the number of shots limited to said hypothetical roleblocker, why would the scum burn it N2 on me, when it's better to save it for an outed PR whose actions the scum need to block?
If they wasted it on me but, say, there was a cop-doc combo (we had a doc and we have cop roles), they wouldn't be able to stop it. (Yes, doc dead N1, butstill.)
In a game that they know will be basically honorary Role Madness with only a few VTs, why would they burn it on me N2 when they could be fucked over by not having the roleblock after, sayyyy, massclaim?
But beyond that, why roleblock me on N2?
The best night to roleblock me was N1, after I announced 0%, strongly hinting at a N1 action.
The second-best time would be N3, the night before the grand reveal I promised would come on D4.
If my role had different effects triggered by different days, then the best nights to stop it would be N1 or N3. The middle of the chain should be the least important part, not the most important part.
The only way that I can see them prioritizing a block on me N1 is if they knew I hadn't acted N1--sayyyyyy, by fireisredsir having legitimately targeted me N1 and reporting that I didn't visit to his scumbuddies?
Basically, no matter how you slice it, Fire is implicated as scum.
If scum blocked Vivax, then my failure is not explained. Thus, Fire scum.
If scum used a rolestopper to defend against Vivax, then fire is scum.
If scum KNEW to use a roleblock on me, that information came from a scum investigation on me--an action which fire claims to have performed on me.
Ergo, no matter how you slice the cake, Fire is scum here.
.
~ closed setup.
~ while the setup does not meet normal guidelines, it is non-bastard, and none of the roles are overly complex.
~ players are not able to multitask unless otherwise specified, with one exception: if a non-town player has the ability to use more than one kill in the same night, the same player may carry out more than one kill.
~ non-town power roles function as normal.
~ using town power roles requires
productivity percentage points
; see below.
2. using town power roles:
~ during each day, each member of the town may choose how productive they're going to be at work that day, ranging from 0% to 100%.
~ if they do not submit anything, they will default to 100% productivity.
~ at the start of each night, each town member will gain [100% minus their productivity that day] productivity percentage points.
~ for example, if they were 75% productive on d1, they will gain 25% productivity percentage points at the start of n1.
~ in order to use their power role, they must have the needed number of productivity percentage points, as said in their role pm.
~ productivity percentage points do not have to be used immediately, and they do not disappear if not used immediately.
3. the average of town's productivity:
~ at the end of each day, the arithmetic average of all townies' productivity that day is calculated.
~ if the average is 75% or higher, nothing happens.
~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.
~ it is
not
publicly revealed what the town's average productivity is, or how many extra kills the mafia has that night.
~ the mafia will only know how many extra nightkills they have, if any; they will not be informed what the town's average productivity was.
4. sample town vanilla and town power role role pm:
Spoiler:
~ note: all town vanillas will receive the same role pm.
Okay so I'm dumb and explaining Rather than working, but I have the wording now, so don't wanna risk losing it later.
BASICALLY:
21? (Too lazy to check if this is the number of players, but I think so?) Players with 4 scum as mountainous is scumsided.
You might wonder how, but keep in mind that if I recall correctly, 11:2 is the balance metric for mountainous.
Double the scum to 4, and you need Double the town, plus or minus 1: 21 or 23 town, to keep it on odds. (Yes, mountainous might not directly scale, but I'm doing loose mental math here. Point is, there's not enough town for it to be balanced as a mountainous.)
What that means is,
THE NET TOTAL SUM VALUE OF THE TOWN ROLES IN THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE MOUNTAINOUS STANDARD:
Any and every boon that the scum has, needs to be weaker than the town's boons. The strength of the extra scum kills and the strength of the scum roles needs to still add up to a sum total LESS than the sum total value of the town's roles.
If we treat mountainous 4 scum as value 0, then scum kills are negative, and scum power roles are also negative. Town's roles having nerfs isn't negative so much as divisive, or if you prefer, multiplicative by a fraction value.
Because a value of 0 is scumsided, the value needs to move notably to the positive, say by +20 (numbers arbitrary).
So, what value does this mean?
Enter, the percentage nerfs.
Percentage has an obvious nerf, in enabling the scum extra kills. This is, loosely, a positive being counterbalanced by a negative. If the town roles all act, it'd be, say, a +20 to a -15-30: loosely breaking even, and being either slightly beneficial to the scum -20++) or town (-15).
The roles are thus naturally counterbalanced by the extra kills, bringing the sum total close to 0. As a reminder, it needs to be significantly higher than 0.
However, there's a SECOND nerf for every power role:
Any with stacking percentages will eventually exceed 100%, and any role exceeding 100% cannot fire every night.
THE MORE ANY POWER ROLE IS USED, THE LESS OFTEN IT CAN BE USED.
This further reduces the value of each PR, effectively making them take a minimum of two days to fire--more, if desiring to limit scum kills.
And then,
THE MORE TOWN ROLES THERE ARE, THE MORE THE CONSEQUENCES FOR USING THEM GROW.
Which means extra punishment dropping the value even further, as this game is quite obviously PR heavy.
Evert town role (except Roden's, which is why I thought it bullshit) has consequences for being used, dropping the points value for the sum total which needs to be notably above 0.
Which means that you'd expect the roles to be strong, right???
...Except their strength is heavily gated. One-shot cop, not full cop.
THE TOWN'S ROLES GATES MEAN THAT THEY ARE TOO WEAK FOR SCUM TO HAVE STRONG ROLES.
Because the town's roles have gates in the form of modifiers, high percentage costs that grow, etc., that means EVEN IN A HEAVILY PR CENTRIC GAME, the scum CANNOT have strong roles, else the sum total is at 0 or even negative, when it needs to be above positive by some margin.
Thus, the scum roles must be fairly weak.
Irchers role to give a conformable role.
A rolestopper or ascetic for some defensive power that doesn't stop all of the town's strength.
An action investigation role that isn't a rolecop, but still gives them info.
And a Goon.
Is a balanced scumteam.
(Outta time.)
(NOTE: Percentage means that town's holstering is dividing town's ++strength to be less; town blasting is multiplying scums' --effect to be greater.)
I realize that this is a theme game with theme mechanics/roles, but the formatting of roles/results/etc. Means that Datisi is clearly channeling his NRG experience.
What this means is that this game in many ways works as a scaled up Mini: 1 extra scum, to 9 extra town acting as a buffer for the extra scum kills.
The balance standard for a mini:
3-4 moderately strong tprs vs 0-1 weak scum prs. Datisi likes his scum prs, which bumps the total up to 4-6 fairly strong tprs vs. 2-3 scum prs. Or, if the town roles aren't all that strong, more like 8 or so tprs of weaker strength.
A popular default scum role combo:
1 interference role (roleblocker strong, ascetic/rolestopper mid),
1 investigative (rolecop strong, tracker type mid),
1 goon or worthless eg messenger role.
Scaled up, you get either 2 messengers (what I thought) or q messenger 1 goon.
And for the town, double the ~8 to ~12-16 tprs.
But the scum can't have the strongest versions of their roles, because they are too strong as-is.
Basically, the percentage mechanic acts as a force multiplier for the scum, and/or a force nullifier for the town.
When the total sum needs to be notably above 0, the scum prs drag the amount too close or even below 0 if too strong.
The town power roles being gated by role gates and percentage costs, as well as fear of the extra kill leading to theoretically using less than the maximum, means that their ~12 tprs don't bump the total up nearly enough.
The scum even having the scum prs be notable drags the total arguably too low imo, but Datisi tends to have more of a scumsided setup lean if I recall correctly.
Yet even with that lean, full roleblockers/rolecops/etc. Is too much.
The scum roles need to be moderate to weak, to account for the town's roles being triple nerfed from their theoretical maximum potential.
And because Datisi likes those scum roles, he has them in their mid-powered format: rolestopper or ascetic,
And an action investigation role.
Now, there IS room for a HEAVILY GATED roleblocker, but it needs to be INCREDIBLY gated.
We're talking, one-shot or MAYBE 2x. (But let's be real, if my memory of Datisi scumsiding setups by default is true, it's 2x. But not 3x or more, even Datisi wouldn't do that.)
So why am I so adamant that it's doubtful that I was roleblocked?
...Because:
LAST NIGHT, THE SCUM KNEW THAT TOWN PRODUCTIVITY DROPPED BELOW 75%.
They had an extra kill.
Because they knew that they had an extra kill, they could estimate how much percentage that the town used: enough to be below 75%, but above 50%.
I had publicly stated I was using 50%, which gave the scum an extra insight into estimating the percentage used. And the conclusion:
THE SCUM KNEW THAT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PRODUCTIVITY WAS MISSING, AND THAT THEREFORE THE TOWN HAD SOME HUGE PERCENTAGE NOT HOLSTERED.
So, if the town had enough not holstered to give the scum a second kill, with them knowing my percentage, they could deduce about how much was missing--and know that by the math, it was A LOT.
Say...enough for a second vig shot from Vivax?
He theoretically could, too! He said he was holstering, but the scum knew that SOMEONE used enough to trigger a second kill. (Or multiple people used a bit which added up.)
Vivax yesterday was, explicitly, a wildcard.
What he said he'd do, what stances he said he had, everything was constantly changing.
So when the scum got a second kill, it wouldn't be too far a logical leap to conclude that Vivax had another shot prepped.
Why, then, would the scum use ONE OF THEIR ONLY SHOTS on ME, rather than blocking THE CLAIMED VIG WHO LIKELY LIED ABOUT HOLSTERING? (Okay, so I'm not sure Vivax did, but from a scum perspective, it SHOULD have looked like he lied about holstering.)
More than that:
With the number of shots limited to said hypothetical roleblocker, why would the scum burn it N2 on me, when it's better to save it for an outed PR whose actions the scum need to block?
If they wasted it on me but, say, there was a cop-doc combo (we had a doc and we have cop roles), they wouldn't be able to stop it. (Yes, doc dead N1, butstill.)
In a game that they know will be basically honorary Role Madness with only a few VTs, why would they burn it on me N2 when they could be fucked over by not having the roleblock after, sayyyy, massclaim?
But beyond that, why roleblock me on N2?
The best night to roleblock me was N1, after I announced 0%, strongly hinting at a N1 action.
The second-best time would be N3, the night before the grand reveal I promised would come on D4.
If my role had different effects triggered by different days, then the best nights to stop it would be N1 or N3. The middle of the chain should be the least important part, not the most important part.
The only way that I can see them prioritizing a block on me N1 is if they knew I hadn't acted N1--sayyyyyy, by fireisredsir having legitimately targeted me N1 and reporting that I didn't visit to his scumbuddies?
Basically, no matter how you slice it, Fire is implicated as scum.
If scum blocked Vivax, then my failure is not explained. Thus, Fire scum.
If scum used a rolestopper to defend against Vivax, then fire is scum.
If scum KNEW to use a roleblock on me, that information came from a scum investigation on me--an action which fire claims to have performed on me.
Ergo, no matter how you slice the cake, Fire is scum here.
As for why fire's claim is a scumclaim, it's a perspective slip.
Fire has two different reasons claimed for checking me two nights in a row, but there's a disconnect between the two.
The first night is a scum investigation of my claim imo, but since it's plausibly town, fair. I believe that scum had FAR more incentive for the action than town, because the reward is far greater for the scum. But because it's plausible as a town action albeit far more optimal a scum action, then let's move on to the next issue:
The second night of investigating me makes no sense from town.
If I was scum who didn't act N1, why would I suddenly act N2?
Fire might have suspected me, but I didn't act N1, and fire had 100% proof I didn't. Meaning that as scum, I wouldn't have suddenly acted N2. There was no scum elimination D2, so whoever performed the N1 kills could and WOULD perform them again.
It's fair for fire to have had Suspicion on me, but fire had every reason to believe that I wouldn't act as scum N2, because I didn’t act N1. Nothing about how D2 went would make a scum player who didn't act N1, act N2.
If I was town to fire, then he'd know that I claimed a D4 reveal and didn’t act N1. This meant that if he thought that I was town, then he'd have thought the action would be N3, not N2.
There's no town reasons for investigating me two nights in a row when N1 gave a no-visit result and no scum died D2.
What that tells me then, is that the N1 target is truthful, but the N2 target is a panicked "You couldn't POSSIBLY have a result on me, I was mune/we blocked you!" (Either works.) Where he claimed that he visited me again, out of knowledge my action failed, but not from a second investigation.
I believe that fire actually investigated me N1, and some other unclaimed town player N2, but changed the N2 target in direct response to my claim. That the N2 claim of me is a TMI panic.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:36 pm
by fireisredsir
now i know how roden felt lol
you are using so many words and yet very few of them are actually meaningful
lemme try to summarize your points
1. you assume that scum does not have roleblocking power due to balance, and if they did, they would not have used it on you
2. you think that i would not have investigated you n2 after seeing you not act n1
as for 1, idk, im bad at setup spec stuff. but it does feel like you're making a lot of assumptions here, and you also made a lot yesterday about why roden was mechanically scum, and your assumptions must have been wrong somewhere. im not gonna argue about your balance points bc that seems v useless and tbh you do know balance better than i do! but there are lots of ways in which you can be correct about balance and your conclusion about my alignment still be wrong
for 2, i already explained my thought process. i wanted to check you both nights bc i wanted to see if what you eventually would claim lined up with my info. it's true that i didn't think about the "no multitasking so therefore scum would need probably multiple goons for someone on the scum team to take no action multiple times" but thats just bc im stupid. i thought that it was most likely that if you were telling the truth you would no-act n1 and then act either n2 or n3 or both, but there were also other possibilities i considered. the way you described yourself turning into a scumhunting god or whatever made me expect you were probably like a joat or could make yourself bulletproof or something
idk maybe im dumb but if i had gotten a "this person took no action" result i would never just automatically think "ok this person is significantly more likely to be town". my approach to the role was instead thinking "ok this is info that i can save for later to check if people are fakeclaiming". like i assume based on the fact that my role exists and it is low cost, every scum is not expected balance-wise to take action every night, otherwise my role would be a lot more powerful than i thought
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:37 pm
by Lukewarm
In post 2667, mastina wrote:So why am I so adamant that it's doubtful that I was roleblocked?
...Because:
LAST NIGHT, THE SCUM KNEW THAT TOWN PRODUCTIVITY DROPPED BELOW 75%.
Mastina, fire might be scum [ I am even warming to Dann's Titus/Klick/Fire solve ]
But your set up spec on why it is confuses me. Probably in part because of how long it all is x.x
This whole post here revolves around scum knowing we dropped below 75%, but what if we didn't and that was actually an vig kill + 1 scum kill?
And I still disagree about your assertion that you could never have been role block. Scum with a 1 shot role cop and a 2 shot role blocker (+maybe goon) does not seem wildly imbalanced to me, and it makes perfect sense to me that those abilities would have both ended up on you.
Your opening post = scum want to role cop you.
The result (and upon seeing your percentage reqs) = knowing exactly when to role block you.
And since they knew that myself and a few others were suspicious of you, they decide to take the route of letting you fail, and land back in the miselim pool.
You are making so many wall posts, and none of what you are saying makes me feel like the above world could never have happened.
-----
And furthermore, the way Titus danced around the PT thing, I think that that is actually likely to have occurred based on my interpretation of what Titus was actually doing.
In post 2652, Lukewarm wrote:Her "conditional" part of her ability is a plausible way out of this situation if she is a scum who role blocked Mastina, and knew mastina was getting ready to reveal that she was roleblocked
This makes this series of posts make way more sense btw -- She was not waiting for the mod to tell her if her ability worked. She was waiting for mastina to tell us that she had been roleblocked, so she can be like "OHHHHH, THATS WHY WE DID NOT GET A PT"
This requires that she both knew fairly confidently that you were firing last night (not night 3), and that your role would tell you that you were roleblocked in someway.
So scum rolecop -> scum roleblock fits with what I felt like Titus was doing here
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:38 pm
by fireisredsir
In post 2668, mastina wrote:Fire might have suspected me, but I didn't act N1, and fire had 100% proof I didn't. Meaning that as scum, I wouldn't have suddenly acted N2. There was no scum elimination D2, so whoever performed the N1 kills could and WOULD perform them again.
like this is just literally never something i would assume???
is that what happens? does the same scum always carry out the nightkill?
like i accept that im probably dumb and don't know how people tend to act mechanically but this is just not an assumption i would ever even consider making
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:42 pm
by Lukewarm
As for Vivax, if they simply believed him that he could not fire night 2 because his ability was too expensive on the next fire, then they don't think that they need to role block him.
But they do think that they need to kill him so he does not get to night 3.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:43 pm
by fireisredsir
In post 2667, mastina wrote:The only way that I can see them prioritizing a block on me N1 is if they knew I hadn't acted N1--sayyyyyy, by fireisredsir having legitimately targeted me N1 and reporting that I didn't visit to his scumbuddies?
Basically, no matter how you slice it, Fire is implicated as scum.
If scum blocked Vivax, then my failure is not explained. Thus, Fire scum.
If scum used a rolestopper to defend against Vivax, then fire is scum.
this is also just kinda failing basic logic and starting at the assumption that im scum and then creating narratives to fit that
nothing about this actually makes me more likely to be scum. if you're town and telling the truth and you got roleblocked, all that tells you is that scum roleblocked you. there's a lot of possible reasons they might do that and a lot of possible scenarios where that could happen
just bc you can think of one scenario where a scumteam with me on it would result in this situation doesn't mean it's the only or even the most likely possibility
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:46 pm
by fireisredsir
In post 2670, Lukewarm wrote:This requires that she both knew fairly confidently that you were firing last night (not night 3), and that your role would tell you that you were roleblocked in someway.
So scum rolecop -> scum roleblock fits with what I felt like Titus was doing here