I'll do it again probably if people are interested, hopefully we can do a mini with 15 people. If anyone wants to come up with challenge ideas that'd be great. I still have 3-4 we didn't get to use. I can always do flash games stuff since that is probably the most fun and maybe a sc2 thing if people kill the SK :p (We need an odd # so that the final day has exactly 3 people, but hard to do team games in odd numbers).

bumatlarge

United States4567 Posts

March 02 2011 23:51 GMT

#426

Mr. Wiggles gets the Boston Rob award! Expect Mr. Wiggles actually win!

darmousseh

United States3437 Posts

March 03 2011 00:20 GMT

#427

I actually was thinking about giving away no clues about the serial Killer, so I decided to go with an obscure clue instead.

Do you guys like the SK?

If the game is larger (15 players) should we have 2 SK's?

How difficult should the clues be to solve?

Should there be any other roles or winning conditions?

LunarDestiny

United States4177 Posts

March 03 2011 01:01 GMT

#428

I think this game lacks conversation, at least in thread conversations.

Maybe make it no pm or something.

On day1, there will be a challenge and the top 3 winner (unannounced) will be pick masons. They have the abilities to add one person every night to their mason groups.

Then there will still be conversations on thread for those not in circle.

THIS SETUP IS A RIP OFF OF CALLER'S THREE KINGDOM MAFIA with clues and challenge.

Mr. Wiggles

Canada5894 Posts

March 03 2011 01:08 GMT

#429

Two SKs might be too much KP, I think. It depends how long people want the game to go. If you're banking on the SKs killing each other, or the clues being easier, then maybe. But for example, this game only lasted 4 game days, and in the end there were only 3 people who would be able to vote for the winner, which seems like a really low number. The SK does make the game progress faster though. If there's no SK, you're looking at 16 days of realtime gameplay for just 9 people. I guess you'd have to weigh the pros and cons, and maybe balance it a little differently.

The game starts off as a free-for-all, so I think that the also SK adds a nice dynamic to keep people from just making uneven alliances right off the bat like this game. If there wasn't an SK, it would have just been the alliance of 5 voting off the alliance of 4 all game, and that seems kind've boring. the SK forces people to be suspicious of each other and makes the alliances more dynamic.

I think the clues should be hard enough to give the SK a fair chance at winning. I can't really comment on the difficulty of them, but if they're all linked to one central idea, I think that's good. For example, I wouldn't have believed my own analysis just because it was jumping all over the place and making weird inferences into random things. Maybe if you made it clear that the clues come from the profile?

I can't think of any other win conditions for this game, but I have two other comments. I didn't really like how you couldn't vote if you had the immunity idol. I didn't really care, because I had a KP, but it seems like you almost get punished for having it. I can think of a situation where the alliances are even, and it would be people wouldn't want to win immunity because then the other alliance decides the vote. I also think it would be cool if you added some surprise factors into the game, like a double vote for the next night announced only at the beginning of the morning phase once in the game or something. The game seemed to play pretty predictably a lot of the time. This is because there's not really any scum, so people don't need to do analysis. This switches the focus of the game more onto general strategy and a bit of interpersonal skills. This is why the SK is important, because without him, people will just behave according to optimal game-theory, and this leads to people just doing what makes the most sense mathematically. For example, you can notice the change in this game, from just having the most numbers, to wanting to kill the SK, and then it got more emotional as we got closer to the end, because of his existence.

darmousseh

United States3437 Posts

March 03 2011 02:29 GMT

#430

Excellent feedback guys. I really appreciate it and I think there are some great ideas.

I think the 1 Sk was good for 9 players since that meant 9 real days minimum. With 15 players, if there is only 1 SK and he gets voted off quickly, then the game will last almost a month. With 2 SK, the game will last at minimum 10 real days assuming the SKs don't kill each other. I'm also thinking that the Serial Killer could alternate until 1 dies. This way the KP stays at 2 the entire game until both Serial Killers are dead.

I really like how the dynamic changed in the game. The actual show gets more and more interesting over time and it makes it fun. It kinda sucks getting voted off right away though.

I have to disagree about immunity though. I think it's very important that the person with immunity can't vote since he cannot influence the vote as much as he likes and it isn't always the best strategy to win immunity. This is very important to keep in mind.

The thing I think can spice it up a little is by making it pair based. So you win if you or your partner win. This will mean people are communicating in the thread and people will try to identify pairs in order to eliminate them (since a pair wins at the very end). No pm's is probably the best though.

Also the challenges will be team based in a larger game. Day 1,2, 3, 4, and maybe 5 will be team challenges, and only after that will be individual challenges. So basically there will be teams of 2 (plus 1-2 SKs). Everyone will be split into 4 teams and then given team challenges and go from there.

I definitely was considering adding surprise factors but I didn't want to go too crazy for the trial run. I have some better ideas for the hidden immunity idol too.

annul

United States2841 Posts

March 12 2011 23:49 GMT

#431

On March 02 2011 11:18 darmousseh wrote:
Thank you everyone for playing survivor. Please leave feedback so we can improve this if people want to play again.

1. Did you enjoy the game?

2. Do you think the pm rules at the beginning were ok, or was unlimited better?

3. How difficult/easy were the challenges?

4. How hard was the clue to figure out?

5. What changes would you make to improve the game?

6. Was it too difficult finding the serial killer?

7. Would you play again?

8. Any other comments

thanks everyone

1. yeah

2. unlimited > not.

3. challenges where you have to "luck in" to win, or must have ridic obscure knowledge... not good. logic challenges, though? good.

4. n/a

5. NO SK. survivor is a pure game as it is; a simple game with no SK would prolong the game and make it more strategic.

6. evidently.

7. yes.

8. no.

Prev 1 20 21 22 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh