Mini Normal 2242 | Opossum Mafia | Game Over!

[cool cookie]

let the chaos commence VOTE: cool cookie

[cool cookie]

I'm going to claim. I'm an Informed Townie. I know there is a Bulletproof Mafia Traitor in the game. I think the quotes below are Redtea signalling to the rest of the mafia that they are said traitor, partly given it was a really weird out-on-a-limb connection to make in the context of the discussion to that point, and partly because there are very few reasons to make such an effort to hint that you are mafia-aligned, other than being the mafia traitor.

(Translator's Note: gay means mafia-aligned)

im gay

VOTE: redtea

I could be wrong, but there's nothing really lost by me claiming anyway as that's my only power.

[cool cookie]

See if this flips red I'll look so cool hammering here

Replace in, hammer scum, get night killed, the replace in dream

why would you be night killed?

[cool cookie]

If t3 tells me to I will

Or GeorgeBailey

Or STD

are they all even voting redtea themselves?

[cool cookie]

The claim is very likely a lie. It's fine, though.


fua is still very blatantly mafia.

please tell me more on all counts

[cool cookie]

See if this flips red I'll look so cool hammering here

Replace in, hammer scum, get night killed, the replace in dream

why would you be night killed?

Hammering the baddie. You'd be the obvious doc target so safer to kill me.

mafia has no good reason to be off wagon here.

They will know a traitor exists, but not know who it is. So either:

A. I'm right, it's redtea, and it's a done deal so they may as well bus.
B. I'm wrong, it's not redtea, and they can whip through a quick mis-elim with clean hands.

[cool cookie]

Nah.

backtrack?

[cool cookie]

i got some reads but will see if i am alive tomorrow to share them

[cool cookie]

See if this flips red I'll look so cool hammering here

Replace in, hammer scum, get night killed, the replace in dream

why would you be night killed?

Hammering the baddie. You'd be the obvious doc target so safer to kill me.

mafia has no good reason to be off wagon here.

They will know a traitor exists, but not know who it is. So either:

A. I'm right, it's redtea, and it's a done deal so they may as well bus.
B. I'm wrong, it's not redtea, and they can whip through a quick mis-elim with clean hands.

If I was scum I'd at least want my traitor to fake claim or attempt to go one for one

if you were scum, you wouldnt know they were your traitor, so by the same logic you'd be giving them an opportunity to avoid getting mis-elimmed.

[cool cookie]

Not giving the traitor an excuse to fish out a PR.

VOTE: redtea

aren't you V/LA until Tuesday?

[cool cookie]

ah that joke doesnt work as i misremembered why Wake wasn't here...

[cool cookie]

And I'm not saying it being a lie means anything about cool cookie's alignment.

>rand town post btw

disagree. just hedging bets.

[cool cookie]

it would be funny if this flips non-traitor mafia

[cool cookie]

redress reaction feels real though.

why would redtea-town stall on a claim?

[cool cookie]

And I'm not saying it being a lie means anything about cool cookie's alignment.

>rand town post btw

disagree. just hedging bets.

Do you really think scum jacket would care that much about being right though?

i saw the chain of events as:

Jacket makes quite bold statement in context of statement
In 320, Jacket begins to walk it back
In next post, when challenged to explain original statement, refuses to even acknowledge it

[cool cookie]

redress reaction feels real though.

why would redtea-town stall on a claim?

No intent to hammer + could be a pr.

you don't think there's intent to hammer?! if a PR, even more reason to claim asap.

[cool cookie]

And I'm not saying it being a lie means anything about cool cookie's alignment.

>rand town post btw

disagree. just hedging bets.

Do you really think scum jacket would care that much about being right though?

i saw the chain of events as:

Jacket makes quite bold statement in context of statement
In 320, Jacket begins to walk it back
In next post, when challenged to explain original statement, refuses to even acknowledge it

I think you're full of shit.

nope i had a big shit earlier, all over you

[cool cookie]

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

[cool cookie]

Vig fakeclaim is risky, as a real vig will just cc with a bullet.

real vig cant kill a bulletproof traitor

[cool cookie]

i think if redtea is a vig, i'm ok with chalking it up to real bad luck that they claimed mafia-aligned in a game with a traitor on Day 1.

[cool cookie]

I think House’s claim of the real vig being able to CC with a bullet will be proof enough when Day 2 comes. Keep in mind that there

is

a vigilante or someone who shoots people in this game one way or another.

given House has since rescinded this, noting the traitor is bulletproof, this is a very bad take. would be good to see an explanation of the second sentence?

[cool cookie]

or "vanilla cop" or whatever its called

I think house means, it's almost guaranteed there is a non-traitor mafia member who is a pr?

a town vigilante who can literally only kill town would be a really crap town PR. even with 1-2 scum PRs here, I'm really struggling to see why we don't elim redtea today. If the claim is true, town perhaps only really gets value out of it once some claims are outted, and that doesn't seem wise today.

actually I think you both are saying the same thing
I'm not actually back but I'm checking in, which has apparently been a mistake because I'm all over the place

I think redtea's reaction to being wagoned is bad.

well thats just cause you're scummy
is that a take ive posted yet?

in Jacket's defence, I've pretty much agreed with everything Jacket has said since our last interaction.

[cool cookie]

like, I'm very collaborative. Unless I'm dead-fucking-sure I'm right, I listen to what town suggests, and especially in this situation. If people don't recommend using it for now, that's fine. I think that's the way to go based on what info we have now too.

in which case, you become effectively vanilla. so why not elim you?

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.

The fact you're gated and the traitor is immune is what makes me think the scum team has one PR & one goon, if your claim is real.

Quasi-investigatives typically have false positives/negatives.

ah yeah, that reminds me, the traitor is NK immune + gated (no specifics given beyond that). forgot to say that as i didn't really think it mattered, but perhaps it would be helpful when the traitor was trying to fashion a fakeclaim to also gate themselves.

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?

see above. also, is redtea the kind of player who just rolls over and dies as scum? i suppose my starting point would be, it's exactly the sort of claim which might get them out of trouble, which makes me instinctively struggle to believe it.

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.

my vote isn't moving off redtea today. essentially, i don't really buy the claim, and i don't think it ever gets resolved at night and it doesnt seem like a particularly good role we'd potentially be losing if we're wrong.

i sort of struggle to believe fua-scum would protect redtea-traitor like this though...

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.

when i initially read through it pinged me because it didn't make sense in context either, although perhaps I misremembered.

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.

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... there may be no vig...

If there’s no vigilante, why would the traitor be bulletproof? Wouldn’t that mean cool cookie and redtea are both lying about the claim?

Unless you’re saying that it’s so mafia can’t actually kill the traitor, in which case what you’re saying is possible. I still don’t think Three’s posts are from someone who’s town-aligned.

traitors are often bulletproof so the mafia team dont accidentally kill them.

[cool cookie]

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.

This also comes across as really forced but I kind of agree with what you're saying.

oh dear

[cool cookie]

why

They seem to be assuming that fua knows that redtea is the traitor, when mafia is uninformed as to who the traitor is.

no, I think I was referring to the hypothetical, but reasonably likely world, where scum BELIEVES redtea is the traitor - in which event, I postulated it could be unlikely that scum would bend over backwards as much as fua did to save them.

[cool cookie]

real vig cant kill a bulletproof traitor

i don't think cool cookie knows a vig can't kill BP but doesn't know that traitors are unknown to mafia

in fact, i feel like i may have even explained that to somebody earlier

[cool cookie]

it's exactly the sort of claim which might get them out of trouble

That's a really short-term strategy. If redtea is fakeclaiming, no 2nd kill on a scum lim outs them, and vig is explicitly a town only role.

Not what I'd associate with a scum agenda.

true, although it prolongs redtea's life for at least another day, and there's enough confusion at the moment that I wouldn't be shocked if it achieves even more. in a hypothetical world where redtea-traitor outted in such a public and transparent way, I can believe the player might also plump for that as their survival strategy - there are plenty of worse things to have done. although looks like I'm in a minority of 1 on that view.

[cool cookie]

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.

The fact you're gated and the traitor is immune is what makes me think the scum team has one PR & one goon, if your claim is real.

Quasi-investigatives typically have false positives/negatives.

ah yeah, that reminds me, the traitor is NK immune + gated (no specifics given beyond that). forgot to say that as i didn't really think it mattered, but perhaps it would be helpful when the traitor was trying to fashion a fakeclaim to also gate themselves.

Gated as in... the bulletproof is complex or..?

no idea, I can only refer to my informed info 'gated', and beyond that, it's speculation.

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?

see above. also, is redtea the kind of player who just rolls over and dies as scum? i suppose my starting point would be, it's exactly the sort of claim which might get them out of trouble, which makes me instinctively struggle to believe it.

I'm not, but I also don't think I'm seasoned enough to think of a fakeclaim like that without help from a partner.

Maybe, although House is arguing you are a much more capable scum-player, who would have come up with an even better fakeclaim than that. On balance, my view is it's possible you could make it up.

I remember part of it was me saying to cookie "wtf, 'i should be limmed if im basically vanilla', i said it before i still have value as town", and that if not for cookie's claim + info I wouldve voted fae for faes post about me

can you explain what this means? why would you vote for me?

[cool cookie]

Wait, how would I know who to go for in that situation?

Personally, I'd say use your best judgement and pray you hit red, because a green flip will require a solid explanation.

I'm sure others will likely disagree with me and want you leashed, but I don't because:

1) I hate being told what to do with my role, so I geddit
2) Probably not the best idea to let unsuspected scum influence your shot, or let them know who to avoid targeting if the target is town

not my area of expertise at all, but a few quick thoughts:

1. if we're leaving redtea alive today, on the assumption redtea can prove their role with a 2nd nightkill, surely we have to pre-determine the nightkill otherwise redtea can always claim to have shot the single NK target/been blocking by something (if lying)?
2. determining the nightkill choice beforehand will also give us information, with the added quirk of mafia not knowing if redtea is actually a vig or not.
3. i think leaving redtea alive today is slightly more palatable if we can use the potential vig shot as a second day-elim, and have the 2 benefits above (self-confirming + info), rather than a blind shot in the dark.

[cool cookie]

done for tonight i think, i'll go from post 548 tomorrow

[cool cookie]

Wait, how would I know who to go for in that situation?

Personally, I'd say use your best judgement and pray you hit red, because a green flip will require a solid explanation.

I'm sure others will likely disagree with me and want you leashed, but I don't because:

1) I hate being told what to do with my role, so I geddit
2) Probably not the best idea to let unsuspected scum influence your shot, or let them know who to avoid targeting if the target is town

then whats the part about how if there arent 2 kills after a scum lim, that will out me as fakeclaiming?

The following Day, there should be 2 flips. One from scum and one from you.

If you're targeting the same player as scum, your reads are shite at best and you need to die.

If scum doesn't know who YOU are targeting, odds are low that they'll hit the same player.

Like, technically they can no-kill, but it's suboptimal play to leave threats against them alive.

or a kill gets blocked. in a world where redtea is a vig, there's a bulletproof traitor out there somewhere, and perhaps town has protective/blocking roles too. plenty of potential excuses for a 1-kill night, made worse if you don't leash.

more generally, you dont elim a vig because they make (subjectively) crappy kill choices. you elim them if you don't believe they are a vig.

[cool cookie]

this like isnt even that relevant but i dont want to end up in a weird situation later

does nobody else (especially those in the "redtea isn't acting like they are scum hoping to survive a meaningful length of time" camp) see this and preceding redtea posts as scum trying to orchestrate a scenario where they can potentially make it to endgame? not unreasonable to do, but flies in the face of the argument redtea is just hoping to survive 1 more day with this claim. i could be wrong though!

[cool cookie]

We should

not

lim redtea today. If what cookie is saying is true, which it likely is then there is probably some kind of vig. If redtea is scum then redtea gets shot. Yay town. If redtea doesn't get shot then we might have a problem, in which case we could lim redtea.

Either way, we gain nothing from limming redtea today. However, statistically we have a chance to get a free redtea scumflip if we leave them alive for tonight.

does bulletproof traitor imply a vig? mechanically it doesn't (basing it on the wiki), but is that statistically true for normal games?

and of course, you can't kill a bulletproof player at night. And given the case on redtea was entirely based on them being bulletproof scum (i.e. not normal scum), them being killed at night by 'the real vig' seems like a longshot. So leaving redtea alive today is a bit pointless if the plan is to elim redtea tomorrow anyway regardless. whatever we are doing, the waters seem quite muddy at the moment, and pinning people down to credible and sustainable positions would probably be helpful - otherwise the same debate will happen every day.

i'm out of steam again, ttfn!

[cool cookie]

i got excited as i saw a post about me!

So... rereading cookie, and I have concerns.

I'm going to claim. I'm an Informed Townie. I know there is a Bulletproof Mafia Traitor in the game. I think the quotes below are Redtea signalling to the rest of the mafia that they are said traitor, partly given it was a really weird out-on-a-limb connection to make in the context of the discussion to that point, and partly because there are very few reasons to make such an effort to hint that you are mafia-aligned, other than being the mafia traitor.

(Translator's Note: gay means mafia-aligned)

im gay

VOTE: redtea

I could be wrong, but there's nothing really lost by me claiming anyway as that's my only power.

1) Why would the mod give info not only about the existence of a traitor, but the fact they're bulletproof? What town utility comes from outing the fact the traitor is bulletproof?

cookie could have left the bulletproof bit out of his claim and let mafia sweat hitting their traitor at night, or think they're traitor was being protected if they did shoot them.

Mentioning the bulletproof bit could have easily been a message from traitor!cookie to his team.

i'm an informed townie, so i guess the whole point of my role is to reveal my information at some point. i revealed it when it seemed relevant. the bulletproof bit is important because, for example, if we had a vig, the vig wouldn't be able to kill them. I.e., we need to deal with them during the day.

The alternative would be I didn't claim that bit, perhaps the bulletproof traitor says "why not let the vig hit me at night" and it becomes a bit messy and a waste of time. So, I'm not convinced revealing the whole thing was anti-town.

That said, of course there's a world where I'm a bulletproof traitor and my claim was simply a ruse to reveal myself. Although if that was the case, it would be a pretty rubbish plan, because at best, scum might think it's between myself and redtea with redtea being far more likely. also it would needlessly reveal to town the existence of a traitor, which isn't in the mafia's interests, since they already have that information. So it's possible, but pretty unlikely.

i got some reads but will see if i am alive tomorrow to share them

Why would town hold off on posting reads after leading a wagon on what they felt was a solid chance at flipping red, knowing that it's probably their only chance to do so if scum flips?

Vc coming, redtea is currently e-1

I don't think cookie was worried about dying at all overnight.

VOTE: cool cookie

I figured I was more likely to die after posting my reads (if i was correct), and at that point I expected we were about to end the day so they wouldn't have had any bearing. I wouldn't say I was super worried about dying overnight, given I'm a spent role, but also due to my profile/townreadness at that stage, would be a half-decent doc-protect candidate. But I thought I could keep my cards close to my chest to avoid needlessly drawing a kill as I like playing!

Also - as I don't think anyone else has noted this - I could potentially just be mafia who wants to buy towncred by throwing my own traitor under the bus. Again it's a fairly kamikaze strategy, and not one which I expect would be very effective (towncred is always pretty fleeting), but its a possibility - hence I don't think redtea flipping red means I'm locktown, so scum don't HAVE to kill me for that reason.

[cool cookie]

So... rereading cookie, and I have concerns.

I'm going to claim. I'm an Informed Townie. I know there is a Bulletproof Mafia Traitor in the game. I think the quotes below are Redtea signalling to the rest of the mafia that they are said traitor, partly given it was a really weird out-on-a-limb connection to make in the context of the discussion to that point, and partly because there are very few reasons to make such an effort to hint that you are mafia-aligned, other than being the mafia traitor.

(Translator's Note: gay means mafia-aligned)

im gay

VOTE: redtea

I could be wrong, but there's nothing really lost by me claiming anyway as that's my only power.

1) Why would the mod give info not only about the existence of a traitor, but the fact they're bulletproof? What town utility comes from outing the fact the traitor is bulletproof?

cookie could have left the bulletproof bit out of his claim and let mafia sweat hitting their traitor at night, or think they're traitor was being protected if they did shoot them.

Mentioning the bulletproof bit could have easily been a message from traitor!cookie to his team.

i got some reads but will see if i am alive tomorrow to share them

Why would town hold off on posting reads after leading a wagon on what they felt was a solid chance at flipping red, knowing that it's probably their only chance to do so if scum flips?

Vc coming, redtea is currently e-1

I don't think cookie was worried about dying at all overnight.

VOTE: cool cookie

So you think Cookie is a bulletproof traitor trying to signal to his team, and that redtea is one of the other two scum fakeclaiming to get the heat off of him since such a thing would align with his own role? I can’t imagine one being scum and not the other.

erm...so you're suggesting I'm a mafia traitor who tried to signal to my mafia team by claiming one of my team is actually the traitor and trying to get them elimmed? I'm sure I'd be really popular in the scum PT in that world! And the irony is, as well as me torpedoing my own team by getting my teammate elimmed and giving town setup info, it also wouldn't actually achieve the purpose of getting my mafia team to believe I'm the traitor, because you'd have to be a complete fool as traitor to deliberately throw your own teammate under with a credible claim.

I'd probably argue the scenario above would be game-throwing, or at the very least, really uncool.

[cool cookie]

a couple other quick thoughts on treachery before i finish catch up, given i have a couple votes on me:

1. I claimed pro-actively, under no pressure on Day 1, information which is confirmable, and in all probability refutable at some stage. I think in any circumstances, it's unlikely I'm a good Day 1 elim here. At some stage we will flip the mafia traitor, which doesn't prove my alignment or role, but does eliminate that paranoid world of cookie-traitor.
2. if I was actually the traitor, why would I be pushing so hard to elim redtea when redtea being elimmed blows my own cover? maybe the fact i make that argument myself, weakens it - but the history books will show i was very relaxed about redtea being elimmed. Cookie-traitor would have relatively little value to team-scum in that scenario, where cookie-traitor is discredited and/or eliminated for being wrong.

objectively, i think it's very reasonable to consider me as traitor a possibility, but unreasonable to consider it high probability.

[cool cookie]

I think for me Cool cookie is the most scumread right now. Hence my vote on him. But Dwele is a scumread for me as well.

VOTE: cool cookie

what?

[cool cookie]

i'm suddenly ok elimming zenman tbh

[cool cookie]

just showed up, ignored my detailed posts explaining why im unlikely to be a premium elim today, and voted me coz i had the most votes. yeah i'm salty, but also that is objectively gross.

[cool cookie]

just showed up, ignored my detailed posts explaining why im unlikely to be a premium elim today, and voted me coz i had the most votes. yeah i'm salty, but also that is objectively gross.

Honestly I’m also subconsciously ignoring you.

what?

[cool cookie]

VOTE: thezenman

[cool cookie]

I don't know what that puts me at, but I assume we're wagoning me despite there being no legitimate case at this point. Real fun wasting my week on this game just to get miseliminated but whatever.

I'm VT.

alas that's often the way in mafia - the games where you put most effort in are the ones you get limmed early. that said, maybe a slightly premature claim at like 4 votes with emotional appeal to boot.

[cool cookie]

Feels like both George and Cool are going after me for the simple reason that I went after them. That's not really a good reason in my mind, and I can't really find either of them making a good case on me.

no there were several people voting for me. i'm voting you because you joined a wagon on me literally because it was the biggest wagon but didn't give any other reason. i did already say that of course, so you didn't look too hard apparently.

[cool cookie]

can someone please do a quick summary of claims for me? i need to catch up on the end of last day, and beginning of this - but likely wont be until tomorrow.

[cool cookie]

cookie knows I'm town and knows my result.
I won't elaborate further.

That's cool and all, but... how can cookie "know" you're town?

If you're softing that they have information from the mod, firm it up, because a "read" is not "knowledge".

cookie knows stuff that strongly implies my claim is true. And I know that cookie knows this stuff. And cookie should know my result.

I can confirm I have info which supports T3's claim. I do not have certainty T3 is town (although if I did, it's unlikely I'd want to say so and paint a big target on their back), but I absolutely would oppose elimming them today.

T3 - is your result evident publicly? or should i simply know, irrespective of that?

[cool cookie]

if the latter, all good. if the former, you'll need to help me out a bit more.

[cool cookie]

I think you should give me a chance to prove myself by flipping someone else. I don't want to claim unless I absolutely have to.

Did you miss this post?

that is cute

[cool cookie]

VOTE: T3

I don't know what to tell people if you can't see this is a fakeclaim at this point.

...you dont think T3-scum could just make up some crap?

[cool cookie]

can someone please do a quick summary of claims for me? i need to catch up on the end of last day, and beginning of this - but likely wont be until tomorrow.

You claimed Informed town.

Redtea claimed Complex Vig.

T3 claimed Odd Night Traffic Analyst Even Night Neighbor Finder.

A50 claimed Bulletproof Neighbor.

Zen claimed to be a Neighbor with A50.

Fua soft claimed a PR but never actually claimed.

I claimed VT.

great thanks!

now can we focus on pressuring either the claimed bulletproof in a game where we know there is a bulletproof mafia traitor (what more obvious signal?), or the claimed vig (and previous prime traitor suspect) who didn't kill anyone?

T3 (but also everyone) - do you think both neighbours are likely to be town?

[cool cookie]

both of them?

who wants to bet one of them's the BP traitor

they may only be chocolate, but please take all of my chips

[cool cookie]

3 bulletproof players in a mini normal game. seriously doubt it

[cool cookie]

Considering that revelation never came to you...

Let's take a look back:

1- Who outed the hood? I did.
2- Who claimed his BP in public? I did
3- Who accused the other of being the Traitor (after more info was available)? I DID

So.. if you're going to claim the Traitor is in the hood was the one and only conclusion I should've had right off the gate, you're still voting the wrong person.

But considering you're SCUM in my solve, I don't find you voting me strange at all. At least once I flip the Town will reconsider and "maybe" someone will decide to tackle the idea that I am correct, and IF your theory of an investigative is in the unclaimed slots is true then all the better.

The thing i find most odd about you is not only are you voting me, but you also claim to believe there might be some yet another unclaimed PR in addition to a Complex Vig (effectively half-Investigative) and a TA/Neighbor Finder (an Investigative).

So, tell me: is it a 3rd investigative you suspect there might exist, or a protective (that has no function because the VTs/Goons are immune to the Vig and we have 2 BP claims)?

interesting post. highlights all the reasons why Almost50 is more likely mafia-neighbour than Zen (a bit counter-productive). But vibes kinda genuine and sincere which gives me cause for pause.

[cool cookie]

cookie is a town mailman who gave me instructions on how to crumb to them by mail last night. My claim fits with their claim very strongly, as cookie will be my only true false positive. I crumbed my result to cookie.

ah, i see i am outted. well, it was a nice theory - in most games I think we get good mileage out of it.

It IS TMI. T3 had just slipped real hard. Let's review the facts:

TRAITOR IS ENDGAMED IF THE MAIN TEAM IS ELIMINATED
2 players are outed as Neighbors
1 is now also outed as Mailman

A "can communicate" result is an outright guilty. WHy not claim it?
A "can't communicate" is enough evidence the target is not MAIN SCUM, so why keep it undercover?

T3 is PLAYING FOR TIME. H;s TAKING SU ALL FOR A RIDE. And if you add this to how long it took him to claim yesterday you get: T3 is OUTED SCUM.

I TARGETED JACKET AND GOT NO RESULT

I think Almost50 was kidding, but if not the answer is that you keep the results secret so scum don't know who to NK - otherwise all your clears get killed. and also, you ideally want to force scum into claims before you out the info. always good in any contest to make the opponent make a decision because they could make a mistake.

It's pretty crazy to suggest that T3 would make that claim with no plan on how to see it through. also, crucially, T3-scum probably doesn't bother faking a result there, that player could just claim a result on me knowing I'm the red herring. It doesn't mean T3 is locktown, but elimming a potentially useful investigative with a credible claim on Day 2, when we have much better options, is not too smart.

On balance, it's hard for me to believe that Almost50 would not know this, as Almost50 is an experienced player. And also hard to believe Almost50 would defend Zen originally, and only now try to turn the tables. It could even be bussing.

I think at minimum we are saying there is 1 scum in the neighbours, but given there is possible 2, we should definitely elim there right? also gives PRs another day to narrow the field of suspects, and we basically have to do it sooner or later.

the first letter of my first 2 posts were 'nr' then after cookie posted next i realized i forgot to crumb my target and the first letter of those 4 posts were 'jack'

yeah gotta work on that crumbing mate

[cool cookie]

Considering that revelation never came to you...

Let's take a look back:

1- Who outed the hood? I did.
2- Who claimed his BP in public? I did
3- Who accused the other of being the Traitor (after more info was available)? I DID

So.. if you're going to claim the Traitor is in the hood was the one and only conclusion I should've had right off the gate, you're still voting the wrong person.

But considering you're SCUM in my solve, I don't find you voting me strange at all. At least once I flip the Town will reconsider and "maybe" someone will decide to tackle the idea that I am correct, and IF your theory of an investigative is in the unclaimed slots is true then all the better.

The thing i find most odd about you is not only are you voting me, but you also claim to believe there might be some yet another unclaimed PR in addition to a Complex Vig (effectively half-Investigative) and a TA/Neighbor Finder (an Investigative).

So, tell me: is it a 3rd investigative you suspect there might exist, or a protective (that has no function because the VTs/Goons are immune to the Vig and we have 2 BP claims)?

Is claiming BP in public right off the bat a plus? I'd say it's rather a negative since better to try and tank a shot. You just went straight into claiming, didn't even try to feel me out in the hood before doing that.

Right now you are scumreading me solely because of mechanics. Plus you still haven't answered why you put out a breadcrumb for scum to know I was not vanilla but actually BP. You did this when you knew that I was trying to bait a shot as BP.

no, claiming BP in a game with a bullet-proof traitor is never a good look, so agree claiming it first is a negative on Almost50. The problem is, you were so reckless Day 1 with no real care about who you voted for, you read as worse in a way. in an ordinary game, you are both scum and both get elimmed.

[cool cookie]

i'm reading that we don't even have to exterminate the traitor to win?

uh is this true?

true, but with the neighbours likely being 1 or 2 scum - maybe not even the traitor itself - we should elim within the neighbour claims. just because they claimed BP, doesnt mean they can only be town or traitor. all we really know is, it's unlikely mechanically they are claiming truthfully.

[cool cookie]

Let's work this out...

Claims so far are:

Gated vig
TA/NF
Bulletproof Neighbor
Neighbor
Informed Townie/Mailman

That's a lot of power against a bulletproof traitor and 2 group scum, ESPECIALLY if both group scum are also PR's which leaves all of the scum vulnerable to the gated vig (at some point, at any rate).

If at least one group scum is goon for vig immunity, the power balance gets even weirder.

There's definitely shenanigans going on in claimed roles.

my guess is the gated vig is actually the traitor, and 1 of the claimed neighbours is group-scum (and the other is maybe bullet-proof)

[cool cookie]

VOTE: Almost50

we should have done redtea yesterday really, to potentially remove this traitor uncertainty from the game. also i can't believe T3 almost got elimmed - like even if you don't believe the claim fully, it's an investigative claim on Day 2, with a bunch of other less useful and more shady claims. I'd look at T3 again Day 3/4 depending on other flips and info in the meantime.

[cool cookie]

Let's work this out...

Claims so far are:

Gated vig
TA/NF
Bulletproof Neighbor
Neighbor
Informed Townie/Mailman

That's a lot of power against a bulletproof traitor and 2 group scum, ESPECIALLY if both group scum are also PR's which leaves all of the scum vulnerable to the gated vig (at some point, at any rate).

If at least one group scum is goon for vig immunity, the power balance gets even weirder.

There's definitely shenanigans going on in claimed roles.

my guess is the gated vig is actually the traitor, and 1 of the claimed neighbours is group-scum (and the other is maybe bullet-proof)

This is seriously scummy.

i would ask you why, but i guess you won't tell from past experience. suffice to say, it's not scummy, it's legitimately what i think - if you think I'm wrong about it, feel free to share!

[cool cookie]

Considering that revelation never came to you...

Let's take a look back:

1- Who outed the hood? I did.
2- Who claimed his BP in public? I did
3- Who accused the other of being the Traitor (after more info was available)? I DID

So.. if you're going to claim the Traitor is in the hood was the one and only conclusion I should've had right off the gate, you're still voting the wrong person.

But considering you're SCUM in my solve, I don't find you voting me strange at all. At least once I flip the Town will reconsider and "maybe" someone will decide to tackle the idea that I am correct, and IF your theory of an investigative is in the unclaimed slots is true then all the better.

The thing i find most odd about you is not only are you voting me, but you also claim to believe there might be some yet another unclaimed PR in addition to a Complex Vig (effectively half-Investigative) and a TA/Neighbor Finder (an Investigative).

So, tell me: is it a 3rd investigative you suspect there might exist, or a protective (that has no function because the VTs/Goons are immune to the Vig and we have 2 BP claims)?

Is claiming BP in public right off the bat a plus? I'd say it's rather a negative since better to try and tank a shot. You just went straight into claiming, didn't even try to feel me out in the hood before doing that.

Right now you are scumreading me solely because of mechanics. Plus you still haven't answered why you put out a breadcrumb for scum to know I was not vanilla but actually BP. You did this when you knew that I was trying to bait a shot as BP.

no, claiming BP in a game with a bullet-proof traitor is never a good look, so agree claiming it first is a negative on Almost50. The problem is, you were so reckless Day 1 with no real care about who you voted for, you read as worse in a way. in an ordinary game, you are both scum and both get elimmed.

Yeah, I will agree I was reckless D1 voting. I honestly should have gone after Geroge fully from the start. It was partly influenced by A50 who was by biggest town-read then and wanted to go after you D1, but also because I had an initial scumread on you. You being the mailman changes things obviously, and also I think A50 is the traitor now. Both of us being scum however is unlikely given us going after each other so hard, especially since now at least one of us is probably going to be limmed.

the fact you're using "we're going hard at each other so we can't both be scum" as a defence, is the sort of thing which pings me as higher likelihood of distancing. The main thing which makes me think 1 of you could be town, is that otherwise it probably means T3 is scum too, because the town utility is a bit useless if both neighbours are also mafia.

[cool cookie]

i'm reading that we don't even have to exterminate the traitor to win?

uh is this true?

true, but with the neighbours likely being 1 or 2 scum - maybe not even the traitor itself - we should elim within the neighbour claims. just because they claimed BP, doesnt mean they can only be town or traitor. all we really know is, it's unlikely mechanically they are claiming truthfully.

You think they could be both scum CCing each other? How does that make any sense? The traitor would just claim to their partner.

I think you're assuming it would be a mis-understanding. in a world where they were both scum, it's most likely a deliberate ploy to make us assume:

A. 1 of them is town because they are claiming same role
B. the scum one is probably only traitor because they claimed gated BP

hence the logic would go, town should not elim in the neighbours. However, I do think the issue with that world view is that it requires T3 to be the final scum, so maybe less likely we've got the whole team there. and don't get me started on how this all interacts with the complex Vig claim.

[cool cookie]

cool cookie is shading the other PRs when it's extremely implausible that all 3 of them are scum. He's scum with T3. Can't wait until we end up chaining mis-elims off this.

i did already make the point it's pretty unlikely both neighbours and T3 are all scum, and that I think the most likely scenario is 2 claims are scum (1 neighbour plus the vig). You commented on that post, so the above is a bit strange as you must know you're misrepresenting me. I could be wrong about 2 of them being scum, and they aren't really linked (a flip on a claimed neighbour has little bearing on the alignment of a claimed vig), so the point about chain mis-elims doesn't make sense. it all especially doesn't make sense when you are also arguing for the same worldview as me - where 2 claimed PRs are scum. I'd have to say at best that's hypocritical.

Out of interest, why do you prefer not to talk to me directly, but instead appeal to the other players? if it's a personal thing that's ok, i'm just wondering if it could be a tell as sometimes mafia can be more shy or nervous to have direct conversation.

[cool cookie]

This whole thing where cool cookie is insisting we protect a dead-ass useless PR for multiple days makes no sense.

are you trying to say the investigative claim from T3 is a useless PR? are you able to explain why? i dont want to patronise you, maybe we are just misunderstanding each other as you seem to have very strong views, but i am struggling to believe your comments about me - because they either don't fit logically in the context of the game, or aren't consistent with your own claimed viewpoints.

[cool cookie]

This whole thing where cool cookie is insisting we protect a dead-ass useless PR for multiple days makes no sense.

So FYPOV scum!cookie messages scum!T3 to tell him how to crumb/fake a crumb to fae, then drops the ball on picking up the very information fae told him to put out?

i think if T3 and I were scum together, a more obvious play would simply be for T3 to claim a 'guilty' on me, and I claim mailman. although the problem with that is, the mailman part of my ability is confirmable (which at least probably makes it less likely I'm a mafia traitor). for what it's worth, i mainly targetted T3 last night because if T3's claim was legit, they would register a false positive on me.

[cool cookie]

the only reason i'm not on A50 right now is because i think he's the traitor and i want to find scum

hmm i made the point earlier that there is little reason to believe Almost50 couldn't simply be group-scum as opposed to traitor. Group-scum claiming bulletproof to get 'off the hook' is a predictable play for Almost50 here.

[cool cookie]

i didnt wanna read the rest and wanted to hammer but t3's at e-3 now
Big "scum found opportunity to defend their partner vibes"
ill properly catch up later but from what ive read the a50 votes are garbage

definitely worth you having a good read through as those are not good takes given what has been happening and I think you were talking some sense until now!

[cool cookie]

groupscum in the same hood with traitor isn't impossible, and would make T3 incredibly valuable had all these claims not been shit all over the place.

nah I think it's just 1 scum in the neighbours. 2 scum neighbours with T3's role as town would be a pretty shitty thing for a Mod to do - although yes, potentially game-breakingly valuable if you are cynical. also, a groupscum in a hood with a traitor kinda makes the traitor redundant - because they are then ostensibly part of the scumteam with communication etc.

[cool cookie]

the only reason i'm not on A50 right now is because i think he's the traitor and i want to find scum

hmm i made the point earlier that there is little reason to believe Almost50 couldn't simply be group-scum as opposed to traitor. Group-scum claiming bulletproof to get 'off the hook' is a predictable play for Almost50 here.

I think it's way more likely that A50 is BP traitor. He claimed BP neighbor right away, which would just be his role minus the traitor part. He did this before even talking to me, so he didn't yet know I was a 1-shot BP neighbor.

Plus, I believe he tried to leave a breadcrumb for his scum partners that I was also BP when I had claimed VT and was trying to draw scum shot to me.

ok that's interesting! are you sure he claimed BP before I outted the BP traitor publically?

[cool cookie]

They either kill him or roleblock him. In this case he was roleblocked, since he got no result.

Again: Why stall on a NO RESULT? What's the point? Scum already know if they blocked him, so why not say it outright?

And even more: THERE IS No ROLEBLOCKER IN THIS SETUP. There can't be. There's a Vig that can't shoot half the players list (

at least

half of it). You don't further cripple them by adding a Roleblocker, a Jalkeeper or a Doctor. And

assuming

T3 is Town, that's also a seriously nerfed role that doesn't ever be more burdened by the existence of a Roleblocker or a Rolestopper. The mist you could do to really really piss them off id to have ONE SLOT untargetable to them (Ascetic or Commuter), and that's really pushing it still.

you're assuming the vig is legit to make the case there is no roleblocker? I'm happy for T3 to clarify on the 'no result' point though - if they were blocked, the whole crumbing thing is slightly redundant.

[cool cookie]

It's relevant cause aren't we suspecting there's scum in the hood because they both said they're 1-shot bp?

yeah im not mad about 2 claims which surely cant both be true, being let off the hook because they must be a traitor - when they would have know there was a bulletproof traitor at the point they claimed, and therefore could easily be a scum strategy. although Zen's point about timing, and the unlikeliness of them both being scum are relevant too.

mind you, if both neighbours were scum along with T3, T3's claim is the perfect one to try and give neighbours legitimacy. but that's really not to worry about today.

who was pushing the massclaim case? some suspicion on that i think

[cool cookie]

the only reason i'm not on A50 right now is because i think he's the traitor and i want to find scum

hmm i made the point earlier that there is little reason to believe Almost50 couldn't simply be group-scum as opposed to traitor. Group-scum claiming bulletproof to get 'off the hook' is a predictable play for Almost50 here.

I think it's way more likely that A50 is BP traitor. He claimed BP neighbor right away, which would just be his role minus the traitor part. He did this before even talking to me, so he didn't yet know I was a 1-shot BP neighbor.

Plus, I believe he tried to leave a breadcrumb for his scum partners that I was also BP when I had claimed VT and was trying to draw scum shot to me.

ok that's interesting! are you sure he claimed BP before I outted the BP traitor publically?

No he claimed BP after you had already outted the BP traitor. I meant that if he were BP traitor Neighbour, claiming BP neighbour is the closes town aligned equivalent. He did however claim BP before I told him I was also BP.

hmm I like that you admitted he claimed it first. And the fact he claimed BP to you after knowing about the BP traitor makes me more wary it's a gambit from group-scum. seems more likely than Almost50 splurging about being the real traitor.

[cool cookie]

my problem is that the neighborhood may or may not be influenced by past games and in a vacuum there's any possible combination of alignments in the neighborhood between {town, scum, traitor}

do you have any other thoughts dwlee

im not sure i understand why you dont want to elim in the hood. we do know a little:

1. unlikely both claims are true as would be pretty weird setup-wise, therefore min 1 scum.
2. unlikely both players are scum otherwise we've solved game, therefore 1 claim likely true.
3. arguably more incentive for scum to claim bulletproof to avoid getting elimmed (coz just a traitor) than for a traitor to claim it as a signal.

at least those are my thoughts on it

[cool cookie]

i will say on T3 though, the whole "cookie can confirm me" at the start of day was a bit overplayed. so I'm still watching there, even though the mechanical synergy is good and i'm never a fan of elimming investigatives early.

Pedit: Save the Dragons did you see my posts about that? good to know your thoughts

[cool cookie]

tbh if we elim Almost50 and he is the traitor, it's doubly useful because it makes it less likely redtea is scum.

[cool cookie]

the only reason i'm not on A50 right now is because i think he's the traitor and i want to find scum

did you miss this post house

I've never cared about those kinds of logical gymnastics.

I'm a simple guy. Red is dead.

If a player reads as scum to me, I'm not going to wrack my brain trying to figure out which one. That's losing WIFOM, IMHO.

can relate to this

[cool cookie]

1. unlikely both claims are true as would be pretty weird setup-wise, therefore min 1 scum.

this is pretty outguessing the mod i don't like it

2. unlikely both players are scum otherwise we've solved game, therefore 1 claim likely true.

how do you know they aren't 2 members of the scum team pretending to be in a neighborhood?

3. arguably more incentive for scum to claim bulletproof to avoid getting elimmed (coz just a traitor) than for a traitor to claim it as a signal.

did they claim bulletproof after the vig was revealed or before?

they claimed bulletproof after according to Zen. if they are 2 members of a scumteam pretending to be in a neighbourhood, either there is a neighbourhood unclaimed out there (which i think is unlikely) or T3 is also scum, and we've got the whole scumteam outted (also unlikely). on 1, it might be outguessing the mod, but it's a normal game, so i think it's fine to expect reasonably normal non-bastard setups. 3 players with gated bulletproofness in a mini normal seems unlikely to me - if it's been done before, show me!

[cool cookie]

in a vacuum it's certainly possible in a normal game

maybe, but i dunno if it's likely. i'm not a regular but it feels weird, especially in a game where one player is specifically informed about bulletproof scum. generally speaking, i would hope mods don't deliberately make setups as awkward as possible to try and trip us up. i think more likely 1 is just lying

[cool cookie]

In a world where the bulletproof traitor is one of the neighbors with town, that puts them in an automatic CC on day 1. Does that make any sense as good setup design? Because it sounds terrible to me. Mafia would be put in a losing position from the start.
at
And if the neighbors were both mafia...wouldn't the traitor just claim to the other one?

Neither idea makes much sense to me.

I'm not sure what this line of enquiry is meant to achieve? You're assuming that the traitor is one of the neighbours - which is possible, but not something I'm assuming. I've already explained why I don't think traitor-scum and team-scum is a likely neighbour pair - aside from the fact it would require us to have identified all 3 scum already which is unlikely, it also makes the traitor mechanic a bit redundant. Your suggestion of a traitor and town neighbour pair is more plausible - the bulletproof traitor is scum so can claim what they want - presumably they would be less likely to claim bulletproof once the existence of a bulletproof traitor is outted. However, even then at worst they have multiple mis-elims before their CC actually becomes inevitable because said traitor would first push against their fellow neighbour (as we are seeing now in real time between the neighbours), and if their neighbour flipped town, they would likely push against my slot to challenge the setup information I shared. Is it a "good" setup design? I don't know. But that element at least seems fairly balanced - after all, a traitor surviving until the end isn't the most important thing for team mafia anyway.

Nonetheless, neither of those world views are most likely in my opinion. I'm currently thinking Almost50 is just normal mafia-neighbour using the bulletproof claim as a cover, and Zen could be just town. Which would mean the traitor is not in that pair. Of course I could be wrong, but there's nothing wrong with giving an opinion and trying to suss out the game.

On the veracity of my information, I'd add to all previous arguments that there seems to be pretty limited utility in my fake-claiming setup info about a bulletproof traitor (what would i have to gain? if we don't flip one, i look worse and worse, plus as a functionally spent role, I'd be sacrificing my own ability to claim a useful PR later), and surely the subsequent claims of bulletproof, vig etc. all support my original claim from a mech perspective. Generally as a rule of thumb, it's worth giving a bit of credence to early claims which end up fitting with the rest of the setup (although maybe too early to make that call here). But overall I'd say Mafia is not about concrete proof sometimes, but the balance of probability.