My comments on it as a tutorial game:
From a tutorial design standpoint, I disagree with the choice to give them little to no power over the game. Even if it ended poorly, remember, the objective wasn't to have someone win, it was to teach new playersIt also would have probably kept their attention better, knowing that they had to make choices. Granted, it could have been the wrong choice, such as revealing too early, but seeing only people who have their own ideas of what is right, such as not shooting with the vig, only shows them how someone else would play, and they can do that easily enough with google.
Making the town strong was a good choice for demonstration purposes, because it meant we could afford to make a few mistakes, which is another reason for the above.
This is personal taste, but I dislike unmodified SK. Given the lack of the cop, it was possible to choose someone like a survivor, because there is no one to reveal he's not "town". Having a third party was a good idea though.
I did love showing that "No Cop" is an option, and hope people can extrapolate from that. Which gives me another idea.
I hate strict deadlines with a passion. When you have votes that happen because of a deadline, and not because of something in game, you lose a lot. It's a factor that helps the mafia, but I understand that they can be useful to stop never ending turns. One problem is there is NO fair way to deal with no lynch at deadlines, so you're forced to choose an arbitrary method. The deadline in this one was worse than normal, because it forced a sink or swim method, and didn't help people learn how D1 is supposed to work. What we DID show them is a policy lynch.
To clarify for anyone not in the know, a policy lynch is where you lynch someone, not for being particularly scummy, but because they hurt the town. In this game, it started as a policy lynch for general uselessness, then became a "random lynch could be MUCH worse". Policy lynching is usually a bad choice, actively going for the win is better than just trying to not lose.
Sadly, ending as it did failed to let us show off the interesting part of mafia, where you actually use the information you have rather than getting lucky with bad role claims. Granted, that was also a limitation of the setting. Here, like I said, there were around 8 to 12 expected people. Almost anyone else would be hard pressed to find a character they could fake claim AND have a role more interesting than VT AND not just look like scum. Compare that with something like WCS which had 30ish roles and no preconceptions, or Roman which had nigh infinite. Or you could go with the C9 and have generic names that give nothing really away. The travesty that was Space had flavour that meant you could fake claim something that sounded believable with a random name. Speaking of which, I need to message What.
Contrary to Nem's belief, I do agree that inactive and bad players can ruin the game. It's a good thing we actually had everyone active, and most of our bad plays were made by the veterans.. Granted we did have some new players, but compare it with the C9 or WCS game. Not bad for some people thrown into a game they knew little to nothing about. I'm also fairly sure showing them that AFK people are detrimental wasn't really necessary anyway, so I'm not sure why Nem brought it up.
Originally Posted by ZERO
Register To Reply
