January 22nd, 2013, 15:31
Posts: 1,487
Threads: 14
Joined: Dec 2011
(January 22nd, 2013, 15:20)Bigger Wrote: (January 22nd, 2013, 15:13)Bigger Wrote: the king is the defacto mayor? thats not bad, actually...
although it does give the assasin extra clues too. Yeah but the guards could equally give false leads and tie up a vote with two guards instead possibly fooling the assassin into thinking the survivors the king. I think king= (secret) mayor is the best solution.
I'm in by the way.
January 22nd, 2013, 15:41
Posts: 6,141
Threads: 10
Joined: Mar 2012
(January 22nd, 2013, 15:31)slowcheetah Wrote: (January 22nd, 2013, 15:20)Bigger Wrote: (January 22nd, 2013, 15:13)Bigger Wrote: the king is the defacto mayor? thats not bad, actually...
although it does give the assasin extra clues too. Yeah but the guards could equally give false leads and tie up a vote with two guards instead possibly fooling the assassin into thinking the survivors the king. I think king= (secret) mayor is the best solution.
I'm in by the way.
even so, if there is a tie the assassin knows that none of the people voting for the one that wasn't lynched is the king. so yeah it would have to be secret mayor.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
January 22nd, 2013, 15:59
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
On reflection I don't think the king as mayor is a good rule, either. Like Bigger says, ties would still be something to actively avoid, because every tie will eliminate one or more possible kings. (The king could not have been voting for the person who survived.). Though if you allow the king to secretly break the tie the other way, then maybe it could work.
The only other option I see, beyond random.org, is to just say that a tie means no lynch. I.e. a 24 hour extension. That's kind of lame too, though.
If you know what I mean.
January 22nd, 2013, 16:04
Posts: 1,487
Threads: 14
Joined: Dec 2011
(January 22nd, 2013, 15:59)zakalwe Wrote: On reflection I don't think the king as mayor is a good rule, either. Like Bigger says, ties would still be something to actively avoid, because every tie will eliminate one or more possible kings. (The king could not have been voting for the person who survived.). Though if you allow the king to secretly break the tie the other way, then maybe it could work.
The only other option I see, beyond random.org, is to just say that a tie means no lynch. I.e. a 24 hour extension. That's kind of lame too, though.
Why not make the mayor themselves random? After a tied vote put the names of all of those who are still alive into random.org. First one out gets the deciding vote. Then tell the players who won the mayor contest along with who was lynched. A new mayor gets rolled everytime there is a tie. This way it still gives information on an individual, and allows the vote to sway the game but there is no king>all ranking?
Any flaws that I can't see?
January 22nd, 2013, 16:11
(This post was last modified: January 22nd, 2013, 16:13 by zakalwe.)
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
How is that different from just randomly choosing one of the tied candidates and lynching him? Everybody can see the final tally, anyway.
Edit - ok, I see some subtle differences, because the risk of tieing the king would be much smaller in the early game. Only the assassin would choose to lynch the king, any other mayor will save him. Still, it sounds like a bit of a needless complication.
If you know what I mean.
January 22nd, 2013, 16:16
Posts: 18,064
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
KISS lads. But I'm not rejoining so pick your preferred petards.
January 22nd, 2013, 16:19
Posts: 1,487
Threads: 14
Joined: Dec 2011
(January 22nd, 2013, 16:11)zakalwe Wrote: How is that different from just randomly choosing one of the tied candidates and lynching him? Everybody can see the final tally, anyway.
Edit - ok, I see some subtle differences, because the risk of tieing the king would be much smaller in the early game. Only the assassin would choose to lynch the king, any other mayor will save him. Still, it sounds like a bit of a needless complication.
Thinking further about it, in practice it might make the game drag a little, particularly if the eventual 'mayor' isnt around at deadline. I guess just random.org is probably the best method practically.
January 22nd, 2013, 16:41
Posts: 4,471
Threads: 65
Joined: Feb 2006
(January 22nd, 2013, 16:19)slowcheetah Wrote: (January 22nd, 2013, 16:11)zakalwe Wrote: How is that different from just randomly choosing one of the tied candidates and lynching him? Everybody can see the final tally, anyway.
Edit - ok, I see some subtle differences, because the risk of tieing the king would be much smaller in the early game. Only the assassin would choose to lynch the king, any other mayor will save him. Still, it sounds like a bit of a needless complication.
Thinking further about it, in practice it might make the game drag a little, particularly if the eventual 'mayor' isnt around at deadline. I guess just random.org is probably the best method practically.
not to mention possibly reveal the identity of the king
January 22nd, 2013, 17:19
(This post was last modified: January 22nd, 2013, 17:19 by Tasunke.)
Posts: 4,421
Threads: 53
Joined: Sep 2011
Hmm. What if the ASSASSIN was the secret mayor?
other than that, I'd just say make (tie resolution) random.org, or assign a particular assymetrical number value to each player.
January 22nd, 2013, 17:21
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
(January 22nd, 2013, 17:19)Tasunke Wrote: Hmm. What if the ASSASSIN was the secret mayor?
Force everybody to vote for themselves on day 1, or get lynched on day 2. The assassin wins the tie break and lynches himself.
If you know what I mean.
|