Next game

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Next game

Give incentive to do what kilga just said and you may have really good game. For example, if you take my philosophy that active people should never be lynched, give the most active person immunity to the lynch for the first 3 days or so. Activity will be defined by the host and he could set the requirements of what makes you active. Or if ties occur or it's hard to tell, subtract a predetemined amount of votes from the most active people.

Other incentives for activity is a lot better than punishing those who are inactive (I.E. phantoms) People who don't care about the current game won't care about thier ramifications.

[talisman]

Re: Next game

If everyone votes for inactives there's no information gained.

kilga makes a good point for late-game. But for early game, the more **** present the more discussion there is, generally. Clearly a balancing point must be found...

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Next game

This is why Manhunt was/is a great idea, perhaps even one ahead of its time. Everyone is green, yes, but there is a good deal of incentive to pay attention because you're one lynch away from victory and you only have four days to do it. You can't sit back and wait for things to happen because the game isn't long enough to allow for it, and you don't want to anyway because if you find just one useful piece of information the game could very well be over.

[xObserveRx]

Re: Next game

It's funny that you mention that Kilga.

My idea for the next game I wanna host looks a lot like (pretty much exactly) Manhunt.

There are a few slight variations, but for the most part, it's TWG IX again. That game looked to be interesting and had lots of activity. Mind you that was at a time when TWG was ...newer? and more? people were interested in it. However, I still think that a game like Manhunt would be very to go through again, considering everyone's comments about games being ran by blues and what not.

If anyone cares to see an exact description of what I have in mind, just say so and I'll throw it up here.

[FishFishRevolution]

Re: Next game

The thing about this blue game is that you can't plan out and make an alliance based on unknown powers. It's just like that game where roles are distributed, but no one knows which roles there are, or even how many. My game is pretty close to an all green game with random jabs of orb use based on each player's discretion. If someone came out and said "hey i seered this guy" you'd have to step back and figure out if he was lying or not based on his actions, not some process of elimination because you know what each orb does. I just think doing it this way opens up the artifact idea so much more, and has the potential to satisfy the actives, inactives, blue-seekers, and all-greenies.

Don't forget about the ever-present puzzle. Every day (maybe every day and night) I'll announce some clue that'll help a wise person figure out what one of the orbs do.

Plus i've got some REALLY cool orb uses.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Next game

I talked with a couple people about this idea, and I'm not entirely sure it's what we're looking for, but it seems semi fun.

I wanted a major mechanic change and so I went with the idea of wolves win on total takeover (i.e. everyone's a wolf, not half) but they don't kill at night, they have a chance to convert a human to a wolf. The chances of success would drop throughout the game. With the chances starting moderately high (possibly even 100% for a night or two) the game would start with fewer wolves than normal. The obvious problem this brings up is the human's win condition. How do you win 1v11 when it comes time to lynch someone? The best answer I have so far is to make a hidden modifier to the wolves votes during the day. This way it may take 3 wolf votes to count as a "vote" towards a human. It creates some mystery in the voting process because as the game goes on, the public results and the actual result will vary largely.

Potential problems that immediately come to mind are game length and anyone with stellar logic skills may garner some extra info from the lynch result. The first point, game length, I think I would rectify by making it somewhat of a speed game. Open firstly to the people who could be at their computers at least once every single day, maybe twice. I'm hoping to use little or no "blue" roles to balance this game, but if they are that badly needed, they would be new roles. I'm very against things that end up "wolf heavy, add guard lol" when at all avoidable. With few blues, I'm hoping nights can go extremely quickly and days will be 24 hours or less, ideally.

The second point to consider is someone with adept logic skills. I think we know who we are. I'm not going to bother explaining how this can be exploited, but I personally would consider it a reward to anyone motivated enough to spend their time in such a way. If I were hosting this game (I say if, because I've often wanted to play my games) I'd not consider it a "point" at all and merely leave it at a "feature" for any willing player. If you want to spend the time getting extra info from my game structure, more power to you, TWG needs more motivated people.

Like I said, maybe it's not what we need right now, but it's an idea I'm working on. Maybe later this week or this weekend, after I get some big homework out of the way, I'm hoping to write a sim program for the design and see how it stacks up to the average game. Rioting has found some noticable trends that he's mentioned to me from his sim, so I'd be assuming those are the "standard" that I should balance this idea towards.

But, yeah, manhunt, I'm game.

P.S. Since Kilga is a raving child post-whore at times, I'll just go ahead and say it for him:

rectify

lol

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Next game

Since Kilga is a raving child post-whore at times

You say this like it's a bad thing. :(

ps

whore

lol

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Next game

It's a good thing when you have the tact of Kilga, but when used by other nameless [cough]JWC[/cough] people, it's a bit annoying.

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Next game

o ok

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Next game

I will be one of the players that exploit this game if it comes to be that way. Just so you know.

Night phases are crap. A game should be designed so that we skip that time period completely. Whenever I need to send in a pm to the host, I almost always do it before night even begins. I feel that everyone else should do the same. You should talk about how to use your power during the day while everything else is being discussed, not 24 hours after.

Be careful with sims though, many times what could happen and what will happen differ so much that considering every possible senario may lead to a false game balance.

I'm taking a one game twg break so if you need a host person I may be able to do it if soomeone wants to play in their own idea. But I won't be playing the next game no matter what it ends up being.

[rioting]

Re: Next game

I have an idea I'm playing around with, see what you think of it: The game would put more emphasis on the social engineering and human interaction part of the game though does not elminate gathered knowledge from special roles. I'm defining the role of clairvoyant as a role that receives a list of either 3 or 4 names at night in which 1 is a wolf and the remaining 2 or 3 are non-wolf. The names wouuld be chosen completely at random but a wolf would be gauranteed to be in the list.

Another addition I'm trying to work out is a group of wolves who do not know each other. Instead of a consensus they would each vote for a night kill and the person with the most votes would die. (Big problem is ties...) The wolves would each get a PM with the votes of the other wolves but not who voted for whom.

4 wolves
2 regular wolf masons (told each other's identity at start of game)
1 unknown regular wolf
1 unknown wolf clairvoyant (4 names received to find clairvoyants)

8 humans
2 masons (told each other's identity at start of game)
7 unknown humans

3 clairvoyants (2 perhaps?)
1 unknown master clairvoyant (3 names received)
2 unknown clairvoyants (4 names received)


Clairvoyant visions are passive and names are chosen randomly (a clairvoyant could theoretically receive the same list multiple times). Clairvoyant lists would not contain dead people or the person receiving the list.

Just an idea to work with but I think it could be fun because it put less power in the hands of the "seer" type role.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Next game

@ Iggy: You're welcome to work with me some more on balancing my idea and host it, should you wish to. It still needs some work, but I wouldn't mind playing it.

@ Rioting: Sounds like a really interesting role, with one major problem. With a list as small as 3-4, the wolves will become extremely obvious once a name is hit twice or 3 times. If you truly randomly choose which wolves are on the list each night, the odds are quite high that over the course of 6+ nights, the same name will show up 3 or more times. It's not guaranteed, but it seems like a very strong ability, especially considering having 3 people with the power. Not to mention how doomed the wolves are when 2-3 of them get together. Also, with wolves not deciding on the kill together, you're essentially giving the wolf masons power over the kill. They'd decide together who to kill, and the other wolves would have no say whatsoever. Just some things to consider. Sounds fun though.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Next game

to rioting: make the clairvoyants only recieve visions equal to the number of wolves. (after that then they no longer get visions). And only have 1 wolf in each list with no overlap. That will greatly balance that role out and create more engineering for those who have the role.

Also, for even more fun, make them all the same vision for each voyant so wolves have the balancing act of not wolfing two humans from a voyant list.

But those are my ideas, take them as you want.

to stoic: I have tons of ideas that I can put out there, including games where the dead can still vote but not post, the dead can still post but not vote, ONLY the dead can vote (faster days/nights and really long game), ive tweaked my 'lowest vote wins' game really well, games where all special roles have to post lies, etc, etc.

Some are good and some are still in square one stage but I'll work out any one of them if people want it.

[rioting]

Re: Next game

@stoic, @iggy:

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm going to work on the idea some more but I wanted to get the idea out. I didn't really look into the odds on the lists but I can see that after having multiple lists distributed, the repetition of wolves' names might jump out. Some other options I was considering: Adding a 5th wolf either known or unknown or removing the unknown wolves and keeping it standard.

Initially I liked the idea of ensuring that no wolf end up on more than one list but then if the clairvoyants collaborated, they could eliminate anyone who showed up more than once in any given night's list. Perhaps the clairvoyants should each receive random lists with a number of names equal to the number of wolves plus one. In that setup they would also act as psychics though.

I'll think about some different scenarios...

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Next game

Or like I said, give the same list out every night. There's no room for setting up alliance so colaboration would never be 100% legit since wolves can lie but if you think it's possible, just make all lists the same/ same lists of 1-4 but each voyant gets 1 of 4 each night.