02-24-2016, 10:55 AM
I "won" and I'm not as satisfied as I should be.
It's the uncertainty that keeps the game interesting for me. I try to get to know the roles of each player as fast as I can because of that uncertainty, and it's usually fun. But when that uncertainty is completely gone, the only thing that remains is a combination of actions which should result in a win (if it's possible). At that point, I think it's better for the game to end.
This is not something specific against mfc or A-Man actions (they were the ones who started doing the PM thingy in the last two games), because they are playing by the rules, and I even remember doing the same in the past. This is more of a "Why don't we stop doing that for a change and see how the games goes?".
I'm sure some roles were overpowered/underpowered as individuals (compare Amadis and MangaD), but I'm not sure if factions were overpowered or not, because it's a complex thing to analyze. I surely wouldn't call this game broken just like that, since I'm sure that Ramond took some time to balance things out in the big picture.
That being said, I remember Ramond saying this was an experiment, so I'll add my two cents:
It's the uncertainty that keeps the game interesting for me. I try to get to know the roles of each player as fast as I can because of that uncertainty, and it's usually fun. But when that uncertainty is completely gone, the only thing that remains is a combination of actions which should result in a win (if it's possible). At that point, I think it's better for the game to end.
This is not something specific against mfc or A-Man actions (they were the ones who started doing the PM thingy in the last two games), because they are playing by the rules, and I even remember doing the same in the past. This is more of a "Why don't we stop doing that for a change and see how the games goes?".
I'm sure some roles were overpowered/underpowered as individuals (compare Amadis and MangaD), but I'm not sure if factions were overpowered or not, because it's a complex thing to analyze. I surely wouldn't call this game broken just like that, since I'm sure that Ramond took some time to balance things out in the big picture.
That being said, I remember Ramond saying this was an experiment, so I'll add my two cents:
- Reveal the roles and his abilities from the start. It's way too chaotic if you don't.
- Enforce the specific rules by not-so-severe punishments. As of now, the severity of the punishment for breaking the rules makes you avoid punishing players at all. Also, no more three-strikes warning. For infractors: why don't you make them unable to talk or vote for a certain amount of days? Other option is just killing them (depending on how breaking a rule affects the flow of the game). I know their deaths would affect their factions severely, but not as much as an instant-defeat (and endgame).
- The rule about ghosts being unable to talk didn't affect the activity of this game, like it used to do in other games. Then again, the bad thing about it is that mafias usually end up killing the active players first... so I'm not sure it should stay in a normal game with not as many players as this one.
- Don't let players send fake PMs from the host. It's just too overpowered and game-breaking.
- I say we have a rule against talking privately. I know that won't stop everyone from doing it, but at least it would stop us from explicitly asking for that in the thread ("send me PMs", "he told me privately", etc).