Yeah, that surprised me too. I mean getting tipoffs via Joe in daychat is one thing but secret access to the scumchat is really powerful.

I have to disagree here. This is one thing I'd definitely keep as is. Joe can anyway just copy the conversation into day chat. Not giving gogtrial read access to day-chat just makes it more cumbersome for Joe, without changing anything balance-wise.

Well the difference is that gogtrial wouldn't know anything that Joe didn't explicitly tell him. I wouldn't assume that Joe would copy and paste the entirety of the night's scumchat for gogtrial and that's kind of the point. I guess Joe could have copied and pasted everything, but that would be their choice to play it that way.

Putting aside whether we should play for potential next games, I don't think I'd be "screwing up" anyone here. I mean, I could win for example with my Lover (L) or with my three other Townies (TTT). Why should giving up your L partner be considered "screwing him up" when playing for the Lovers win not be considered screwing up your TTT team? No matter my choice, I win with one person(s) or another: I can't win with both.

A win is a win and you should play for your win condition. If one win is "worse" than another one, the mod/setup should clearly say so.

I'm wondering a little bit if there would been quite this much criticism about the setup if we hadn't won.

There were a host of ways in which our choices and gambles could've backfired. We lucked out in many ways, so there's no doubt from me that it's a swingy role - but more than that? As with a SK, death would've been an instant faction loss, but we had twice the attack surface, and no ability to determine our own fate until we'd completely gotten rid off two mafia players - without arousing their suspicion! If they'd suspected, it'd have been instant loss for us. Similarly, if we'd really been in the 0T scenario rather than 2T, our claim would've been immediately suspect. If there'd been a vig, we would've been in trouble right until the bitter end.

Them having exactly same win condition means Joe had no reason to hide anything. How would Joe having to copy-paste make the game more balanced in the sense of making the Lover team less overpowered?

It's like putting a restriction "you have to type with one finger only" (assuming you had a way of checking it). Sure it makes the person's job harder, but balance-wise it makes no difference whatsoever.

I disagree. Additionally to what SirPrimalform said - the way you did it, you removed any and all effect/consequences of what, how and when JoeSapphire shared had on their strategy and tactics, and how that may have reflected on their in-game-thread play.

I'm not saying that Joe would have a strategic reason not to relay everything, but I would expect most people would simply relay what they think is important and this introduces a variable element.

EDIT: In fact, I would go as far as to say that in this sort of situation there should be a no-quoting rule meaning that pertinent information needs to be relayed in the spy's own words.

I think it's safe to say that even if town had won there'd be a general agreement that you were pretty overpowered vs the mafia (poor mafia). :P

He would just copy-paste the whole conversation first thing he logs during the Day. That's the what, how and when of it.

(Even if for some reason I disallow copy/pasting verbatim - see my point to SPF below - then it would become "He would just rewrite in his own words the whole conversation first thing he logs during the Day.") Balance-wise it would be exactly same, just a bit more cumbersome (like having to type with one hand) for the lover pair.

The no-quoting PM rule is an artificial restriction necessary since quoting PMs is the equivalent of showing your card: it's something only Town can do and is therefore game-breaking.

But there is no reason to add artificial restrictions where they are not needed. And Joe's case is nothing like the above: there is no game-breaking advantage for the team to be had by no-quoting that couldn't be obtained by Joe rewriting the conversation (other than having Joe waste 2-3 RL hours).

If you think Lover team was unbalanced: fair enough. But there is no reason to add bad cumbersome restrictions on top of bad setup design.

I think you've missed the point I was trying to make if you think that's the intended outcome! The point would be that the spy would have to choose the important parts to summarise and the information that their teammate gets would be subject to human error. You're right that a rule against quoting is cumbersome though. I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here.

p.s. I find it amusing that it's me and HSL arguing on the same side now.

p.p.s. The game was good fun! I have said before that I'd rather play an unbalanced game with an exciting twist than a perfectly balanced open setup. And wow, what a twist!

FWIW, as a casual observer I was very much in the "lynch Joe" camp from late D1/early D2.

I also agree with HSL and SPF here, esp on giving an outsider observer access to a private chat. Wow. Umm...that's...something I guess.

I'm not sure the "if" faction scenario matters all that much, since a component of what's being discussed is setup, which is up to the mod moreso than how you played it. And as your fake claim pointed at, the "semi-open" nature of the setup is undercut somewhat by the repeat that there's a twist, which leaves players a bit unsure how much they really know.

I actually disagree with the "instant loss for us" part as well - or at least, I think you're overstating how likely that is. When I think "twist" I think can of beer with lemon added to it (twist!), not "can of beer that's really chlorine gas! haha I told you there was a twist!"

It's hard for me to buy that mafia is going to ever operate on the assumption that the person who they've been told is on their team and has full access to their identities AND THEIR CHAT is actively working against their wincon. After D1, even if they were to conclude you were a saboteur with separate wincon, if they do kill you, they've given town info to scumhunt, which still works against them.

The closest I think we've ever come was the weird role Brasas had in Drealmer's game, and even then Brasas' option was basically to abandon ship but not to actually sabotage them outright. And, other balance problems aside, Drealmer at least balanced that somewhat by expanding the size of the mafia team.

I would put this in the "bit tooooo clever" bit, and yeah, also I think the surprise falls well into bastard mod territory rather than "twist."

In terms of town, unless I missed it I guess I was a bit surprised that there wasn't some serious consideration of NL as a tactical option on that last day.

Given the actual setup, in retrospect it probably wouldn't have mattered - realistically with wyrm/HSL locking horns Vitek or SPF eats it and Joe/trial pile on to either wyrm or HSL to end it anyway, but with the setup unknown there were some upsides to talking it out at least, I thought.

What would NL have gained us?

More info ;)

Vitek probably had the best case for town, after Trial/Joe, but he wasn't exactly lock town. Scum chat gives you a few hints - they were still guessing at a few bits, so it would have forced them to make a decision.

Even from a town perspective, there was still the musing that SPF (or possibly Vitek?) was SK, though I wasn't reading closely enough to see if people meant that as a serious proposition. But if there were an SK in the game it would have been quite bold for them to still keep it holstered at that stage, and there's some chance maf/SK hit each other if so, or that a single kill again tends to lessen that likelihood further.

Again, not definitive, but with 6 alive, and 1 scum as the most likely scenario but not conclusive and the "twins" as the closest thing to lock town, there wasn't any absolutely urgency to act either.

Worst case scenario in NL from 6 is (assuming town twins + SK kill elsewhere) is 1 town + 1 Maf + 1 SK [left alive next day].

One day, I shall have the ability to kill at will. Oh yes, one day. And then shall you all rue. RUE I SAY!

(My biggest fear pre-game was FINALLY rolling SK, only to have to choose whether the N1 cop investigation kills me or the N1 mafia kill eliminates me. Both would have made me sad after I'd finally gotten murderin' powers.)

Or even better, making him kill himself. Double the hilarity as town wakes up to see THAT flip. "WTF? Why did mafia kill their own?"

I'm somewhat in agreement with ZFR on this point. The mafia lover could just copy/pasta the chat. In theory, anyway.

In practice, a number of us are too lazy to actually copy/paste.

It is the difference between "We're agreed to play for our joint win-con" and getting backstabbed, and "I do not guarantee your success. Watch your back." If my lover and I agree to play full co-op, then I expect them to fulfill the bargain. If we're each going to be looking out for Number One, then I'm generally okay with that, but I want to know in advance.

In the first scenario, if I get backstabbed then I would be on the look-out for a chance for payback in the future. In the second scenario, getting backstabbed is just the price of doing business; if I didn't want to get backstabbed, then I should have played better and/or backstabbed first.

Townies typically expect any given other player to possibly be out to screw them (that being the Mafia team's whole objective), so being 'betrayed' by someone with a different win-con isn't really a betrayal.

*shrug* Some of it is just armchair quarterbacking. Some of it is legit objections.

If you two had to claim D1, then ya'll probably wouldn't have gone the distance. Being able to wait to claim until we're near the end definitely worked in your favor.

Disallowing copy/paste would have significantly changed the dynamic, because now the town lover is getting everything filtered, instead of being able to look through the unfiltered chat as another pair of eyes. If copy/paste was not allowed, then not allowing the town lover access would definitely be the correct response (imo).

With copy/paste allowed, giving thread access lets lazy players continue to be lazy (and I think was the right choice).

I'd say that's a pretty compelling reason to go ahead and lynch, specifically to avoid that worst case scenario. It goes from "Town can force a win" to "Town has to hope Maf and SK kill each other, and Town doesn't have a choice in the matter". As I said in game, an SK kill suddenly popping out on that last Night was my nightmare scenario, leaving the Town dependent on Mafia and SK killing each other.