Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kashyyk]

I personally think it would be better if the Alchemist started with a set of Ingredients which the alchemist could use to create his potions as the game progresses. Therefore, if he thinks he is going to need a health boost soon he could make an Iron Blood potion.

I could see it would need to be carefully balanced though.

[Pandarsenic]

Maybe different potions with different powers, composed of a combination of two ingredients, and he can bring four of whatever type?

Four kinds of ingredients leads to 10 potion types, three leads to 6 kinds.
AA, AB, AC, AD
BB, BC, BD
CC, CD
DD

That allows a degree of improvisation and adaptability, reasonable limitation, and multiple unique combinations.

Or I'm crazy and sleep-deprived and my idea sucks. I'm too tired to say.

[Kashyyk]

Well, Craziness is great for thinking up ideas, and I personally think that that is a good idea.

[SniHjen]

Hmm...

Necromancer:
3rd Party
Always dark element.
15 health (like the warrior mage)
Healing assist does not work on him.

The seer will ofcause mistake him for the cabal, due to his dark element


Win Condition:
revoke the ban on necromancy.

Lose Condition:
Necromancy remains banned.

The winner of the tournament is asked if he wishes to revoke the ban on necromancy.

[Pandarsenic]

But... with that, the problem is everyone just promises to revoke the ban on necromancy... Add in a counter to that and it's a separate fight within the tourney unrelated to the main event.

[Mr.Person]

But... with that, the problem is everyone just promises to revoke the ban on necromancy... Add in a counter to that and it's a separate fight within the tourney unrelated to the main event.

Is that a problem?

[Pandarsenic]

I don't much like that sort of thing, m'self. All role conflicts should be linked to the "main event," I feel.

[Mephansteras]

Hmmm, yeah, I'll keep things fairly simple for now.

I kind of like the idea of the mixable ingredients, but I think for now I'll stat with the basic potions. I don't want to throw too much extra variability in quite yet.

---

Now that the first round is pretty much over ( nothing can really effect this last duel, it's just down to raw stats), I'd like to get feedback from people. What did you like, what did you not like? Did things feel pretty balanced overall?

[Neruz]

Two things come to mind;

The distribution of special wizard types; several people were normal boring old wizards. Considering the large number of different types this seems really silly. Furthermore i noticed we had a bit of stacking going on, there was like what, 2, 3 Archmages? It would probably work alot better if stacking like that was minimised.

Secondly, Dark magic. There's really no reason to pick it; you lose the weakness true, but you also lose the ability to get +4's from certain assists that align with your stat (which is pretty major, since the Cabal know each other's alignments and thus can line up their assists properly) and you lose the 1 in 4 chance that your enemy will do half damage. So basically if you choose Dark magic you're giving up 2 strengths and a weakness for zilch. Furthermore if you do choose Dark then you're twice as likely to be uncovered (as not only can the Justicar find you, but the Seer can too). So if you choose Dark magic you give up 2 strengths and a weakness, and then gain a whole new weakness! The choice is clearly inferior.

It doesn't need much, but i think if somone picks Dark magic they should be able to then pick an element that their Dark magic will mimic. If the seer uses his action on them then he 'sees' the mimiced alignment, not the Dark one.


If you get the role mixes down properly and give the Cabal a decent incentive to go Dark (cause right now they really don't have one) it should work much better. It was also good fun, although jumping in halfway only to discover i was Cabal was, uh, fun.

[Mephansteras]

Well, keep in mind that the stacking of roles was only on a per-side basis. I don't see anything wrong with having, say, a tower battle-mage and a cabal battle-mage.

Also, unlike normal mafias, a plain Wizard can still have a huge effect on the game with his assists. Not quite as strong as some other roles, but I think it is a bit more interesting then vanilla townie in most mafias. Of course, we'll have to hear what the players who got the basic Wizard role thought.

[Neruz]

Well, keep in mind that the stacking of roles was only on a per-side basis. I don't see anything wrong with having, say, a tower battle-mage and a cabal battle-mage.

True, didn't notice that. That makes a bit more sense but it still seems a bit silly to reduce the variaty of potential players by sucking up slots with dupes and normal wizards.

If you didn't have so many roles i'd agree, but there's all these roles, it seems such a waste.

[Pandarsenic]

Except a normal wizard is fucked for the final condition of being the archmage. In fact, almost everyone but a Battlemage/Archmage (I don't remember which) is screwed for that bit.

[Neruz]

Werl if the Archmage(s) are killed off early then it's fine. Remember that the Tower win if any of them become the High Mage, while the Cabal win if any of them become the High Mage.

[Pandarsenic]

The thing is, even when your side wins, you want to be the Last Man Standing, which is very difficult for a normal mage.

[JanusTwoface]

I'm not quite sure about the balance as of yet.  Granted, this game got down to a couple of tight decisions in the last day of the game, but still.

I finally got around to running my simulations:
Archmage vs Tower Mage: 100% Archmage win.
Cabal Archmage vs Tower Archmage: 98%
Cabal vs Tower Mage: 96% Cabal win.
Cabal Archmage (0.5x damage) vs Tower Mage (2.0x damage): 100% Cabal Archmage

Basically, I think combat might need to be reworked somewhat.