Balancing Infiltration

[Matthew4444]

Basically, a hacker can choose to "bug" a terminal. Since all things typed into a terminal are text, the text that was put in at the bugged terminal is sent to the hacker. So let's say Magenta is a hacker. They go to C-3 and find a seer terminal. They choose to bug it. A couple turns later, Olive finds the seer terminal. Olive wants to seer Grey. Magenta would get a message like: C-3 Terminal "Grey". Olive would get the response of "Green", but Magenta wouldn't get the response. Magenta would also still not know what the response was.
That was a poor example, because it doesn't have as much of a practical application there. But if a hacker were to bug other terminals, such as a validity check or a gas terminal, then they could know more incriminating things. Although on second thought, maybe relaying the answer as well would be a better idea.

[CypherToorima]

But then everyone would be hackers. It gives them much too much power, in my opinion.

[Matthew4444]

This was just to give the humans in general more power. Of course other classes would be compensated, and maybe even have the Reds be able to do nasty things by hacking a bugged terminal.

[User6773]

This was just to give the humans in general more power. Of course other classes would be compensated, and maybe even have the Reds be able to do nasty things by hacking a bugged terminal.

Now you're talking about even further balance changes by balancing everyone else to reflect the changes you've offered.

The #1 rule of game design is to KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid.)

[evilbutterfly]

Chardish, I think your new class ideas would work just fine. Hackers being able to fix terminals makes them much more useful, and seeing the number of people who chose hacker last time and the fact that Alert Mode will be toned down, probably everybody will be a hacker. Also, all the Reds will be vandals. Why hack a terminal when you can just destroy it? I'm not saying these classes should be nerfed, but the other classes should have further uses. For example:

Sneakers can only be seen by other Sneakers or Creepers. The Red's Creeper would be able to be seen by players (not that it would matter, because they'd kill the person as they enter the room), but they'd be the only ones who could see Sneakers. As is, Creepers are fairly useless compared to the other wolf classes, but being the only ones able to easily kill Sneakers would make them very useful. Also, being mostly invisible would make the self-preservationists more prone to being Sneakers.

Hackers should be left as you said. Able to fix a hacked terminal and use it in one turn, but fixing a destroyed one takes a whole turn. As far as balancing between Vandal and Cracker, I propose this: Warriors can destroy terminals. Vandals also destroy terminals, but can't fix them. Crackers CAN fix them. Thus, warriors not only eliminate guards, they can shut down gas terminals, too. This also gives wolves more incentive to be Crackers, whereas in your original idea they're a stupid choice next to Vandals.

Also, you've not said anything regarding Reds being able to kill multiple people as they enter the room. I think they should only get one surprise attack on someone. This would encourage moving in pairs, which would also encourage class diversity. Hackers and Warriors travelling together could make quite a team. Able to destroy bad terminals, fix good terminals, and they'd only be able to be taken out if at least two Reds came after them at once.

I think this provides every class with an appropriate counter, so people will not all bunch as one class because it leaves the entire team vulnerable to one class or the other. Please respond to my ideas rather than just posting your own new ones like you've always done in the past :P.

[User6773]

Chardish, I think your new class ideas would work just fine. Hackers being able to fix terminals makes them much more useful, and seeing the number of people who chose hacker last time and the fact that Alert Mode will be toned down, probably everybody will be a hacker.

Probably not, I still forsee sneakers as being valuable for being able to move without fear of alert. Though maybe Sneakers do need an extra "kick", I don't know what it is yet. Some sort of immunity vs. the reds would be too big of an advantage. When envisioning classes, I think to myself "What would the game be like if everyone chose this class?" If that makes the game shift too dramatically, I cut back. Any type of defense against the Reds is too big of an advantage. I would like for Sneakers to be able to use terminals during Caution mode, but that goes back to the idea that it then becomes an advantage to trigger Alert everywhere so that the Sneakers can harvest information.

Also, all the Reds will be vandals. Why hack a terminal when you can just destroy it?

I was envisioning enforcing 1 class per wolf. So only one would be a Cracker, only one would be a Vandal, and only one would be a Creeper.

Sneakers can only be seen by other Sneakers or Creepers. The Red's Creeper would be able to be seen by players (not that it would matter, because they'd kill the person as they enter the room), but they'd be the only ones who could see Sneakers. As is, Creepers are fairly useless compared to the other wolf classes, but being the only ones able to easily kill Sneakers would make them very useful.

No, being the only ones able to easily kill Sneakers makes them far overpowered. I do agree that the Creeper is a bit weaker than the others. I'm wondering if making him immune to History terminals would help him out a bit. This gives him more of a special role, instead of "I'm a Sneaker who works for the Reds."

Also, being mostly invisible would make the self-preservationists more prone to being Sneakers.

Everyone is, at their core, a self-preservationist. And due to the special nature of this game, where the humans have a better shot at winning the more of their own they have alive (which is not the case in TWG), it is in everyone's own best interest to be a self-preservationist.

Hackers should be left as you said. Able to fix a hacked terminal and use it in one turn, but fixing a destroyed one takes a whole turn.

I didn't say that. I said it should take a full turn to fix either hacking or destruction.
The reasoning behind this is:
a) destroying terminals is already more popular among the Reds than hacking. Making hacks easier to fix than destruction doesn't make hacking a better option.
b) if you're a hacker, you can detect hacked terminals. Non-hackers will simply attempt to use the terminals, whereas hackers will fix them. Thus, letting the hackers use/fix the terminal in the same turn means that the hacking ability does not deter hackers, whereas the destruction ability deters everyone. Whereas if the hacked terminal cannot be used in the same turn it is repaired, it deters hackers (as they will be forced to waste their turn fixing it) as well as non-hackers (because they will get wrong information from the terminal.) I hope that rambling train of thought made sense, but the bottom line is that it's senseless to nerf hacking when it's already nerfed as it is.

As far as balancing between Vandal and Cracker, I propose this: Warriors can destroy terminals. Vandals also destroy terminals, but can't fix them. Crackers CAN fix them. Thus, warriors not only eliminate guards, they can shut down gas terminals, too. This also gives wolves more incentive to be Crackers, whereas in your original idea they're a stupid choice next to Vandals.

Not a bad idea, but I don't like the idea of destruction of the gas terminals being an option for the Greens. Remember that it's 4-to-1 against the Reds here - and every terminal in the facility is there to help the Greens, except 1 (possibly 2 if you count the switch terminal, though I think it could be used defensively.)

Also, you've not said anything regarding Reds being able to kill multiple people as they enter the room. I think they should only get one surprise attack on someone. This would encourage moving in pairs, which would also encourage class diversity. Hackers and Warriors travelling together could make quite a team. Able to destroy bad terminals, fix good terminals, and they'd only be able to be taken out if at least two Reds came after them at once.

I have to keep coming back to the spirit of the game. In the end this is a game about information gathering and trust, not about how you can use your cool superpowers to take on the facility. The powers are there to add diversity to strategy - as I mentioned in an earlier post, the facility is a playground for schemers on both sides. This is anything but a traditional role-playing game.

Despite Kefit's view, I think the fact that a single leak of information or a single bit of misplaced trust can lead to your immediate death is what makes this game all the more interesting - because teamwork is necessary to win. The final objective absolutely cannot be completed without 4 people working on the same side - but who do you trust?

Giving the players a "trust parachute" of this kind, where everyone has a safety net that prevents a mistake in trust from costing them their life, defeats the purpose of the game. Mistakes are deadly. This doesn't mean that people should avoid communication, it simply means that people should think twice about informing anyone where they're going.

I think this provides every class with an appropriate counter, so people will not all bunch as one class because it leaves the entire team vulnerable to one class or the other. Please respond to my ideas rather than just posting your own new ones like you've always done in the past :P.

Will do. But can I hear some people's thoughts on the Anonmess terminal and the Electronic Lock terminal?

[Kefit]

Get rid of all the useless terminals, definitely. Both the electronic lock and messege terminals should go, and so should the guard terminal (I really don't see how it is useful).

Last game I managed to run into a guard terminal, an anonymous messege terminal, and a lock terminal befure I died. This was incredibly annoying, as even if alert mode hadn't always been active, I still wouldn't have been able to do anything worthwhile.

Balancing the terminals would also remove a little bit of the luck aspect of this game, which I think is in a game of this nature's best interest.

And I still think we should try a game with no classes at all and balance that first before we play around with classes a bunch.

[blahblah18]

Well Chardish's class ideas work, and I think they would be of minimal importance in comparison to the game itself, which is very important.

On chardish's ideas... the terminal that tells you where a X terminal is is ridiculously beyond overpowered for BOTH sides, and it becomes whoever finds one of those wins... Patriot finds it to know what to hack/destroy Foxhound uses it to find seer terminals and everything else.... COMBINE that with the map terminal, and it becomes game over. I strongly suggest not using that terminal. EB said most of the other things I was thinking of, and then Chardish's most recent point hit everything perfectly on the head... I'll think about it some more.

[evilbutterfly]

Oh, I ought to answer Chardish's question: yes, definitly remove those 2 terminals. I don't like the move terminal either, though I see how it could be useful.

[Kilgamayan]

A switch terminal would've come in handy to get the superlocater back.

[HansSky]

Yes, but considering that you can fix destroyed terminals now, there is not much use for it.

[Kilgamayan]

Maybe, but the wolves would still know where it is.