Mafiascum.net

In post 398, Three wrote:

In post 392, House wrote:

In post 391, Three wrote:I don't see how a false inno on a Goon effectively makes a Goon a PR if redtea can't shoot Goons but can shoot PRs.

I'd say immunity to a PR's action and the potential to mislead town with a false Inno is pretty powerful.

Sigh. You're just arguing semantics then. And not even particularly useful semantics.

I'm arguing UTILITY.

Staying to think you're not really misunderstanding me.

This shit is getting pretty blatant.

In post 399, redtea wrote:I think three made the point that my role is borderline negative-utility

I did.

Three echoed.

I feel like the two of you are more or less on the same page, even if you got there in a roundabout and crisscrossed way

In post 393, redtea wrote:

In post 388, Three wrote:

In post 386, House wrote:

In post 383, redtea wrote:Ooooooh
Would 1 goon, 1 pr, and 1 traitor pr be balanced

That's my guess.

It would effectively make your role borderline negative utility.

This is where I'm at.

If people genuinely believe that we have a Vig that can only kill minimum zero/maximum one scum that otherwise only kills town PRs, why exactly is this slot still breathing if some people don't even believe the claim?

jeez rude, I'm still a member of town and that has value.

In post 386, House wrote:

In post 383, redtea wrote:Ooooooh
Would 1 goon, 1 pr, and 1 traitor pr be balanced

That's my guess.

It would effectively make your role borderline negative utility.

true. Does that point two 2 mafia prs then not counting the traitor, assuming the mod didn't have some odd idea then? And assuming I'm town ofc.

This was exactly my reasoning a few posts ago.

redtea wrote:i'll post my queer flag collection asdkjfnladsknf would that clear me

Queer townbloc sounds good to me.

In post 348, redtea wrote:Okay caught up didn't realize people did say I should claim
I'm a town complex vigilante. Explains the bulletproof mafia, but that's also why my claim might not be that helpful as the counterpart has already been revealed.

This claim seems too complicated to come from scum?

In post 352, Dwlee99 wrote:T3 do you still think I should hammer this? Does not sound smart

Hmmmm
Nah

In post 358, cool cookie wrote:i'm ambivalent about the claim. an outted traitor doesn't serve much purpose for mafia, so there isn't anything we particularly lose by giving redtea a night to prove the claim. gut is i don't buy it though

In post 364, Three wrote:

In post 339, T3 wrote:Eghhhh
I kind of see where jacket is coming from with fua obv scum though

How so?

Fua's vote on george gut pinged me as really terrible.

and then

In post 371, Jacket wrote:

In post 368, Three wrote:The scum team never has Goons in a 2 Mafia + Traitor scenario, so a failed kill should be considered a clear.

I think making assumptions about setup composition based on what you think is balanced is a very bad idea.

This is more reviewer meta though.
2 goons and a traitor never happens, it's almost always 2 prs and a traitor.

In post 400, House wrote:

In post 398, Three wrote:

In post 392, House wrote:

In post 391, Three wrote:I don't see how a false inno on a Goon effectively makes a Goon a PR if redtea can't shoot Goons but can shoot PRs.

I'd say immunity to a PR's action and the potential to mislead town with a false Inno is pretty powerful.

Sigh. You're just arguing semantics then. And not even particularly useful semantics.

I'm arguing UTILITY.

Staying to think you're not really misunderstanding me.

This shit is getting pretty blatant.

Please take a second to breathe. This is the first time you mentioned utility, you specifically said PR before this. I don't really care about winning a semantics argument, especially since we're apparently on the same page anyway. So maybe drop this pointless back and forth.

In post 401, House wrote:

In post 399, redtea wrote:I think three made the point that my role is borderline negative-utility

I did.

Three echoed.

Why are you so tilted?

In post 403, Three wrote:

redtea wrote:i'll post my queer flag collection asdkjfnladsknf would that clear me

Queer townbloc sounds good to me.

aw yeah

this is ridiculous
if this isn't tvt i'll eat this delicious brownie
does scum go this hard over mechanics

In post 409, Three wrote:

In post 400, House wrote:

In post 398, Three wrote:

In post 392, House wrote:

In post 391, Three wrote:I don't see how a false inno on a Goon effectively makes a Goon a PR if redtea can't shoot Goons but can shoot PRs.

I'd say immunity to a PR's action and the potential to mislead town with a false Inno is pretty powerful.

Sigh. You're just arguing semantics then. And not even particularly useful semantics.

I'm arguing UTILITY.

Staying to think you're not really misunderstanding me.

This shit is getting pretty blatant.

Please take a second to breathe. This is the first time you mentioned utility, you specifically said PR before this. I don't really care about winning a semantics argument, especially since we're apparently on the same page anyway. So maybe drop this pointless back and forth.

Utility is... what makes a PR... a PR...

A PR... without utility... is just a... named townie/scum...

400head.

or setup rather

In post 412, redtea wrote:this is ridiculous
if this isn't tvt i'll eat this delicious brownie
does scum go this hard over mechanics

It's TvT and I'm annoyed.

In post 383, redtea wrote:Ooooooh
Would 1 goon, 1 pr, and 1 traitor pr be balanced

Depends

In post 412, redtea wrote:this is ridiculous
if this isn't tvt i'll eat this delicious brownie
does scum go this hard over mechanics

People tend to write off shitfights like this as tvt
in practice they are actually slightly >rand t/s

In post 406, T3 wrote:

In post 358, cool cookie wrote:i'm ambivalent about the claim. an outted traitor doesn't serve much purpose for mafia, so there isn't anything we particularly lose by giving redtea a night to prove the claim. gut is i don't buy it though

In post 364, Three wrote:

In post 339, T3 wrote:Eghhhh
I kind of see where jacket is coming from with fua obv scum though

How so?

Fua's vote on george gut pinged me as really terrible.

I see.

VOTE: Fua

In post 417, T3 wrote:

In post 412, redtea wrote:this is ridiculous
if this isn't tvt i'll eat this delicious brownie
does scum go this hard over mechanics

People tend to write off shitfights like this as tvt
in practice they are actually slightly >rand t/s

I guess I should've said that it wasnt just the back and forth, but the vibes of it plus the fact it's all over the place
interesting tho

i think also it depends on the players

*really* terrible?
is testing someone's scumhunt theory on page 2 *really* terrible?
something to poke into maybe but I wouldn't call it terrible

Whatever happens, we shouldn’t eliminate redtea. By nature of their actual role, unless they and the informed townie are scum together, then they’re essentially confirmed town unless they get shot by the real vigilante overnight, no? I feel like anyone trying to push for them to die because of their ‘lack of utility’ just wants to see a townie die to begin with, and strikes me as incredibly suspicious. Not to mention that redtea doesn’t even have to shoot until we’re sure we’ve bagged a mafia.

VOTE: Three

Your insistence on killing off someone who claimed a PR comes off as weird to me. Maybe the mafia has two power roles and you’re afraid of getting shot at night.

If we don’t believe the claim, then let the real vigilante shoot redtea at night. If redtea is still alive, that means that they’re a confirmed townie or we just found two scum covering for each other.

In post 35, fua wrote:VOTE: GeorgeBailey

Sure, I'll buy this and put some pressure here. I think trying to be quirky is weird too.

On reread, this does come off as really forced.

PE: Hoo boy.