Next game

[FishFishRevolution]

So I think I'm going to host next game (or at least apply for hosting, however you twc people have changed things while I've been gone), here's the idea:

ORB CHALLENGE

16 people:
HUMAN:
4 human theives, 1 human curator, 1 master theif

WOLF
2 wolf theives, 1 wolf curator, 1 normal wolf

The game is going to work a lot like the artifact game we're playing now with a few important differences:

Orbs will be color coded, so there will be no "hint" as to what they do. Basically every orb will be an "unknown."
When you get an orb, instructions on how to use the orb will be given. You can choose to use the orb or ignore it. If you choose to use it, its effect will take place, and the orb will be redistributed randomly. If you choose to ignore it, you will keep the orb until either you use it or someone steals it from you.

The curator is a role who retains orbs even after use. He can only lose orbs if he is stolen from.

Night events will take place as follows:

• Wolf kill
• All orb uses
• Stealing
• Orb redistribution
• Day - pms to each player about their new orbs

This sequence of events means that if every single orb is used during the night, the only orbs that will be available to be stolen that night will be the curators'.

Also, it must be said that not all the orbs are favorable to have. Upon use, a few of the orbs may have undesireable effects, but because of this, the orbs that have positive effects are very powerful. To counter this mystery, at the beginning of each day a hint/clue about the nature of the orbs will be given.

Balance issues, questions? Anything I didn't specifically spell out will likely play just like the artifact game.

[Afrobean]

I can't even follow this game anymore because "artifacts" are just stupid in my opinion. It bends the game even further from what it should be in my opinion: a game of logic and deduction, of intrigue and social engineering.

What's with you people? First you love your blues as crutches now you want games involving items which give the power of blues and end up just making the game about who has the items instead of about using deduction and social engineering to find rogues.

[FishFishRevolution]

You just can't deal with the intellectual evolution/exploration that this game can be taken to online. The orbs in this game are designed NOT to be a crutch and are also harder to track. The orbs can do as much damage as they can aid, and since the only blue roles involve the orbs, if you were to ignore them, you've got yourself a normal game. Also, coming out with your orb will not be a good idea as it's not a temporary as the artifacts were.

[talisman]

I've found that complete opposite from what afro seems to feel. artifacts are adding intrigue, and heightening the logical complexity of the game.

[FoJaR]

yes.

orbs.

[FoJaR]

i pretty much love the word orb.

[FishFishRevolution]

One more thing I'm considering is having a person's orb be removed from the game if they chose to ignore it that night. If they chose to use it, the effect wouldn't happen because the kill takes place first, but the orb will still be in play.

[vashthestampede0987]

Since you won't answer me on AIM trevor I'll ask it here >_>

Are orbs destroyed if the holder dies (lynch of wolf'd)?

[StoicRoivaS]

I'm not totally against it , but just not the very next game. I'll add more when the current TWG is over, but if you're somewhat "in the know", you'll notice that what I had in mind for this game and what is actually happening are two different things. If you intend to go with items and thieves, I'd suggest making some other mechanics that make it more distinct from my game. Thieves can't steal from thieves, no chain of "orb" trading, other things I can't mention, etc. The idea is good in theory, but I'd have to sit down (figuratively) with you sometime and work through the problems the current game has. In it's current form, and even the slightly altered form you suggest, I wouldn't want to run this game again. With some tweaks (read: added rules), it might be closer to what I had originally intended. Granted, I'll be the first to admit, I came up with the idea in about a half an hour after reading Talisman's post suggesting it, and it still needs some work, but with that work, it should certainly be playable at some point in the future.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by talisman

I've found that complete opposite from what afro seems to feel. artifacts are adding intrigue, and heightening the logical complexity of the game.

Perhaps for you, but they don't pique my interest, and thus don't add any "intrigue" for me. As for logical complexity... who cares? I want deduction over logical complexity.

Remember: I'm the guy that doesn't even like blues. I want the game to be about finding wolves using deduction and social engineering. I don't like when powers and things are what decides who wins or loses the game.

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by FishFishRevolution

pms

lol

[iggymatrixcounter]

TWG is evolving into a game of blue strategy and I don't particularly like it. I mean if I have the resources, I'm going to use them as I see fit, but I hate it. I hate getting into a situation where I'm exposed to blue powers and basically have an Iggy with TWG company V. the wolves. Yes I'll brag about it but I hate it hate it hate it. I want to actually play a game where I'm forced to put up subjective stuff instead of, I pwn you and if game isn't over, you get pwn'd and we still win.

I'll be a little blunt so the next game can be planned well.... the humans pretty much have this game won. I know the last three wolves and it's just a matter of red tape before the game is over. But I can't just call the insta either because I need to talk to EVERY single thief and confirm artifacts from EVERY player. I even thought about going to stoic with 2 names in exchange for 2 wolf picks, I mean that's how bad the situation is for the wolves.

And both sides, as far as I can tell, have played perfectly (with the exception of disco, but that's the only thing that either side has experienced as far as set backs.)

The problem essentially comes down to alliance forming. You find a way to crush iron clad alliances and you can have the best of both worlds: logical blue strategy AND subjective reasoning and social engineering.

Another thing that will aid games is the lee-way the wolves haves in being able to lie, if they are locked into a certain game type then there's little that can be done. thus game = boring.

Something that I found while playing on another site is that they always have hidden alliances, because the guardian only has a 50% chance of actually guarding his pick (with a multiplier subtracted for guarding every night, so by day3, if the guardian has been guarding the alliance head all game, there's only a 12% chance it'll actually work), so that's enough to scare away public alliances. Stuff like that need to be in each and every game. If it can be quantified too easily, then the game will be boring.

@stoic: good job giving away my tactics XD. But it's ok, I'd rather see better planning then keep the fine details of the current game a secret.

[Kilgamayan]

In all seriousness, this topic needs more Manhunt.

[talisman]

The more normal (green) a game gets, the less active it gets (especially early on).

A game MUST force the wolves to take chances and PLAY early on. Otherwise the humans have nothing to talk about and the game gets stagnant. I would love to play in a game where everyone, including the wolves, has to make a well-supported vote day one and day two without the excuse of "well it's day one and no one really talked about anything because there was nothing to talk about so I'm voting ______ [fill in new player's name] because they probably won't help us."

So the perfect game finds a way to put enough evidence out there early so that there is something to talk about, and hopefully something to debate, and even more hopefully, someone to debate about. If people have to take sides, wolves will be forced to play, and the game gets more interesting. This nearly happened with dbp in the current game, but certain confounding variables fouled things up a bit (not the least of which was that his case was tilting heavily to the wolf side in the first place).

The essence of twg is supposed to come down to using the previous day's votes to deduce the wolves. The role of blues and artifacts should be to increase discussion to increase the chances of debate and providing more opinions for analysis.

[Kilgamayan]

The problem is blues and artifacts don't increase discussion, at least not by much. Blues and artifacts result in everyone listening to one person telling them what do to and who to vote for.

Green-filled games may condone sitting around with your thumb up your ass, but at least you're choosing to sit around with your thumb up your ass instead of being told to do it.

[iggymatrixcounter]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.