Dominion Strategy Forum
Miscellaneous => Forum Games => Topic started by: Jimmmmm on July 08, 2013, 07:37:10 pm
-
I was thinking about how to do a Mafia-like game in which the Mafia team is in majority, and I came up with this simple idea:
5 people, 2 Good "Townies", 3 Evil "Mafia". The Evil team knows who each other are, the Good team don't. The game takes place over up to 3 rounds. At the end of each round, each player secretly names another player, which are all then simultaneously revealed. If the two Good players named each other, they immediately win. If after 3 rounds this has not occurred, the Evil team wins.
Thoughts? I have no idea if this would be balanced or fun, but I'm happy to run it if people want to give it a go.
-
Sounds interesting, but I have no idea how I would play it. ;D
-
Round 1:
A names B, B names A, C names D, D names C, E does whatever.
Round 2:
A names C, C names A, B names E, E names B, D does whatever.
Round 3:
A names D, D names A, C names E, E names C, B does whatever.
Good win if good team is: AB AC AD CD BE or CE
Evil win if Good team is: AD AE BC BD
So good has 60% of winning.
-
Thats if its pure random, and enforced by players. Evil guys can reduce that chance, of course.
-
What happens in the rounds themselves?
-
What happens in the rounds themselves?
Discussions.
-
/in
-
I was thinking about how to do a Mafia-like game in which the Mafia team is in majority, and I came up with this simple idea:
5 people, 2 Good "Townies", 3 Evil "Mafia". The Evil team knows who each other are, the Good team don't. The game takes place over up to 3 rounds. At the end of each round, each player secretly names another player, which are all then simultaneously revealed. If the two Good players named each other, they immediately win. If after 3 rounds this has not occurred, the Evil team wins.
Thoughts? I have no idea if this would be balanced or fun, but I'm happy to run it if people want to give it a go.
Round 1:
A names B, B names A, C names D, D names C, E does whatever.
Round 2:
A names C, C names A, B names E, E names B, D does whatever.
Round 3:
A names D, D names A, C names E, E names C, B does whatever.
Good win if good team is: AB AC AD CD BE or CE
Evil win if Good team is: AD AE BC BD
So good has 60% of winning.
I actually think it is 75% chance of winning.
If I'm Good Player #1, I have 4 people to choose from in round 1. So 25%.
Second round, I have 33% chance of choosing correctly.
Final round, I have a 50% chance.
But, basically, I get to choose 3 out of 4 players. Unless I completely whiff, I win.
-
I was thinking about how to do a Mafia-like game in which the Mafia team is in majority, and I came up with this simple idea:
5 people, 2 Good "Townies", 3 Evil "Mafia". The Evil team knows who each other are, the Good team don't. The game takes place over up to 3 rounds. At the end of each round, each player secretly names another player, which are all then simultaneously revealed. If the two Good players named each other, they immediately win. If after 3 rounds this has not occurred, the Evil team wins.
Thoughts? I have no idea if this would be balanced or fun, but I'm happy to run it if people want to give it a go.
Round 1:
A names B, B names A, C names D, D names C, E does whatever.
Round 2:
A names C, C names A, B names E, E names B, D does whatever.
Round 3:
A names D, D names A, C names E, E names C, B does whatever.
Good win if good team is: AB AC AD CD BE or CE
Evil win if Good team is: AD AE BC BD
So good has 60% of winning.
I actually think it is 75% chance of winning.
If I'm Good Player #1, I have 4 people to choose from in round 1. So 25%.
Second round, I have 33% chance of choosing correctly.
Final round, I have a 50% chance.
But, basically, I get to choose 3 out of 4 players. Unless I completely whiff, I win.
That's assuming that the other good player chose you on the same round you chose him.
-
Anyway, I like the idea that everyone is pretending to be one of the only good people, and knowing that most people are lying. Any ideas on good ways to do it?
-
I was thinking about how to do a Mafia-like game in which the Mafia team is in majority, and I came up with this simple idea:
5 people, 2 Good "Townies", 3 Evil "Mafia". The Evil team knows who each other are, the Good team don't. The game takes place over up to 3 rounds. At the end of each round, each player secretly names another player, which are all then simultaneously revealed. If the two Good players named each other, they immediately win. If after 3 rounds this has not occurred, the Evil team wins.
Thoughts? I have no idea if this would be balanced or fun, but I'm happy to run it if people want to give it a go.
Round 1:
A names B, B names A, C names D, D names C, E does whatever.
Round 2:
A names C, C names A, B names E, E names B, D does whatever.
Round 3:
A names D, D names A, C names E, E names C, B does whatever.
Good win if good team is: AB AC AD CD BE or CE
Evil win if Good team is: AD AE BC BD
So good has 60% of winning.
I actually think it is 75% chance of winning.
If I'm Good Player #1, I have 4 people to choose from in round 1. So 25%.
Second round, I have 33% chance of choosing correctly.
Final round, I have a 50% chance.
But, basically, I get to choose 3 out of 4 players. Unless I completely whiff, I win.
That's assuming that the other good player chose you on the same round you chose him.
Oh, missed that part.
-
It actually sounds a whole lot like the 'Conspiracy' game I ran awhile ago, but I find this one more interesting. You just have to get the distrobutions right.
-
Having just seen the Princess game that started up has got me thinking about ideas for this, here's something (might need refining).
Some number of players. Let's say 9 players for now. 6 form the informed majority (good guys), the other three the minority (bad guys). All of the good guys know each other, the bad guys know nothing. The basic idea is the bad guys are trying to find each other through discussion and an information source in game.
The game takes place in four rounds. Each round starts with a chance for talking (let's call it day for familiarity). After some deadline, the game moves to night. Except in the final round, each bad guy names two people (both different, not themselves). The good guys collectively talk (via QT or whatever) and for each bad guy, name a pair of people including at least one good guy.
After the night phase the next round starts and a score is revealed. This score is the number of bad guys named by the bad guys, i.e. collectively how many of each other they managed to name, so anything from 0-6, during that night. If the good guys guessed exactly the two people a bad guy would name, that bad guy is now 'neutralised' - I don't know who (if anyone) gets told this has happened at this point. People can then discuss e.g. reveal who they named, and any kind of analysis, scumhunting etc. can go on.
At the end of the fourth round things are a little different. The good guys are done. All bad guys who weren't neutralised name two more people, trying to guess their allies. If any of them names both of the other bad guys, the whole bad guy team wins. If none of them do, the good team wins.
That's the rough idea. Any thoughts on it? Likely broken strategies? Worth giving a test run after Princess is over?
-
Having just seen the Princess game that started up has got me thinking about ideas for this, here's something (might need refining).
Some number of players. Let's say 9 players for now. 6 form the informed majority (good guys), the other three the minority (bad guys). All of the good guys know each other, the bad guys know nothing. The basic idea is the bad guys are trying to find each other through discussion and an information source in game.
The game takes place in four rounds. Each round starts with a chance for talking (let's call it day for familiarity). After some deadline, the game moves to night. Except in the final round, each bad guy names two people (both different, not themselves). The good guys collectively talk (via QT or whatever) and for each bad guy, name a pair of people including at least one good guy.
After the night phase the next round starts and a score is revealed. This score is the number of bad guys named by the bad guys, i.e. collectively how many of each other they managed to name, so anything from 0-6, during that night. If the good guys guessed exactly the two people a bad guy would name, that bad guy is now 'neutralised' - I don't know who (if anyone) gets told this has happened at this point. People can then discuss e.g. reveal who they named, and any kind of analysis, scumhunting etc. can go on.
At the end of the fourth round things are a little different. The good guys are done. All bad guys who weren't neutralised name two more people, trying to guess their allies. If any of them names both of the other bad guys, the whole bad guy team wins. If none of them do, the good team wins.
That's the rough idea. Any thoughts on it? Likely broken strategies? Worth giving a test run after Princess is over?
Sounds kind of like Mastermind, where you are guessing colors and order. Here you are seeking combos, and getting a score to judge how well you did.
How's winning work? When one bad guy correct guesses the other two? Or when all three correctly guess?
-
Having just seen the Princess game that started up has got me thinking about ideas for this, here's something (might need refining).
Some number of players. Let's say 9 players for now. 6 form the informed majority (good guys), the other three the minority (bad guys). All of the good guys know each other, the bad guys know nothing. The basic idea is the bad guys are trying to find each other through discussion and an information source in game.
The game takes place in four rounds. Each round starts with a chance for talking (let's call it day for familiarity). After some deadline, the game moves to night. Except in the final round, each bad guy names two people (both different, not themselves). The good guys collectively talk (via QT or whatever) and for each bad guy, name a pair of people including at least one good guy.
After the night phase the next round starts and a score is revealed. This score is the number of bad guys named by the bad guys, i.e. collectively how many of each other they managed to name, so anything from 0-6, during that night. If the good guys guessed exactly the two people a bad guy would name, that bad guy is now 'neutralised' - I don't know who (if anyone) gets told this has happened at this point. People can then discuss e.g. reveal who they named, and any kind of analysis, scumhunting etc. can go on.
At the end of the fourth round things are a little different. The good guys are done. All bad guys who weren't neutralised name two more people, trying to guess their allies. If any of them names both of the other bad guys, the whole bad guy team wins. If none of them do, the good team wins.
That's the rough idea. Any thoughts on it? Likely broken strategies? Worth giving a test run after Princess is over?
Sounds complicated, I'll give it another think over at some point. Is there a reason the informed majority is the good team? I would think that if it's good vs evil it's the evil team that would be informed, since they're the team that has to deceive.
-
Sounds kind of like Mastermind, where you are guessing colors and order. Here you are seeking combos, and getting a score to judge how well you did.
How's winning work? When one bad guy correct guesses the other two? Or when all three correctly guess?
Yep, quite a bit like Mastermind, but the information you get out is obfuscated in a different way. I was thinking more like Resistance when coming up with the rules.
Winning/losing is all on the final rounds guess (reread the last paragraph, you probably just missed it). A bad guy could correctly guess at any earlier point, but if they change their mind later, sorry, your fault. And note if they do guess correctly earlier, the good guys can't neutralise them on that round (yeah I thought of a few possible breaking strategies in advance :P).
Sounds complicated, I'll give it another think over at some point. Is there a reason the informed majority is the good team? I would think that if it's good vs evil it's the evil team that would be informed, since they're the team that has to deceive.
I think it shouldn't be too bad once you get the idea down. Day phase, discussion. Night phase, name two people. Get a combined score at the start of the next day but risk being neutralised if the good guys second guess you. Find your team by day 4 to win.
No particular reason for good/bad guys. Just arbitrarily choose and I thought I'd go for not the normal. I can see your reasoning there as well, might be simpler to understand that way around.
Note I thought up this idea in about 5-10 minutes, so it's likely rough around the edges a bit.
-
I think I'm still confused.
So I'll use maj and min for the teams. Nights 1-3:
minx3 submit 2 names that do not include themselves.
maj as a group submit 2 names PER min member.
Scoring is 0-6, with the number based on the number of maj members named by the min guesses.
If maj team was able to match a min guess, that min member is neutralized.
Night 4, active min members get one chance to guess their partners for the win.
At night (1-3):
The majority's goal is to neutralize the minority members at night by matching guesses.
The minority's goal is to figure out who the other minority members are by guessing pairs.
The final night:
The majority hope to have neutralized all or most of the minority.
The minority hope to guess their partners.
Neutralization is never made public, right?
-
That looks about right, yes.
Just to clarify what the majority would do, they'd submit an order that looks something like (assume 1-3 are the minority):
Player 1 guesses Player 4 and Player 6
Player 2 guesses Player 7 and Player 6
Player 3 guesses Player 1 and Player 4
And if any of those are correct they neutralise the player.
-
The Princess game we're playing right now reminds me of a game I once played called "Are you the Traitor?" Everyone has a certain role, and they're trying to find other players' roles fastest without giving themselves away.
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41541/are-you-the-traitor
-
I actually really like the sound of Jimm's game, though it is much harder than people said. If I am correct noone is told who chose wrong. So let me see:
Mc, robz, Jim, ash, galz are playing.
Mc and robz are town, Jim, ash, galz are mafia.
Round 1: player-chosen
Mc-Jim / robz-ash / Jim-mc / ash-robz / glaz-anyone
Now all we know is one of me and Jim is not town and one of robz and ash is not town.
Round 2:
Mc-ash / robz-Jim / Jim-robz / ash-mc / glaz-anyone
Still no win,
Round 3:
Mc-robz / robz-mc / Jim-ash / ash-Jim / glaz-anyone
We win.
So yes, you pick one person who is not town and I you are right you win.
3 mafia out of 5. A town player guessing has a 75% chance of picking a mafia player to "sit out" and thus winning the game. The difficult part is that mafia will 100% never let the mafia player sit out, but town should 100% never change the "sat out" player.
Yea I would be interested to see it will either be great, or a high town won rate.
-
Now that Save the Princess is over, I think I'd like to try giving my game a test run. Any volunteers? Probably go for 48 hour days, 24 hour nights, so it'd take a little under 2 weeks total?
-
Now that Save the Princess is over, I think I'd like to try giving my game a test run. Any volunteers? Probably go for 48 hour days, 24 hour nights, so it'd take a little under 2 weeks total?
Jimmmmm for sure. I'll give it a go.
-
Now that Save the Princess is over, I think I'd like to try giving my game a test run. Any volunteers? Probably go for 48 hour days, 24 hour nights, so it'd take a little under 2 weeks total?
When are you starting up?
-
Probably not, considering a general lack of interest.
-
Probably not, considering a general lack of interest.
Your interest, or others' interest?
If it's fairly quick, I am sure you will get signups quickly. StP filled in an evening or so.
-
Probably not, considering a general lack of interest.
Your interest, or others' interest?
If it's fairly quick, I am sure you will get signups quickly. StP filled in an evening or so.
Agreed. Even a two-week game should fill. StP had/has the advantage of being a one-day thing. I still think your game would fill, though.
-
Well, alright. I guess I'll open signups in a separate thread at some point.
-
Been thinking about this some. Here's an idea I came up with, I'll call it "Come From Behind Mafia" inspired a bit by Innovation, Inc.
So, as in other cases you have 5 players, 3 scum, 2 town.
-The 2 town players are secret (1-shot) double-voting, doctor-vigilantes.
-The 3 scum are secret (1-shot) *double-voting mafia goons, with daychat, with a special rule (*) on their secret vote that it cannot be on the same target as their actual vote.
-Secret votes are cast by PM, and are included in vote counts, but not who cast it.
-Simple majority of the maximum votes on a player are needed to lynch...so that's 4 day1 (7 vote max on any given player), and could be something different on later days depending on how things play out.
Otherwise this runs as per normal mafia rules.
At a basic level, if town can recognize their fellow member, then they can lynch scum, and protect each other at night while killing the remaining 2 scum. If they vote for their fellow townie, scum can quick-hammer and win. Scum can pretend to have double-voting powers by coordinating secret votes, but they cannot lynch town unless the townie helps.
There are a variety of situations that could come up depending on what combination of lynch/no-lynch and night kills happens.
-
Been thinking about this some. Here's an idea I came up with, I'll call it "Come From Behind Mafia" inspired a bit by Innovation, Inc.
So, as in other cases you have 5 players, 3 scum, 2 town.
-The 2 town players are secret (1-shot) double-voting, doctor-vigilantes.
-The 3 scum are secret (1-shot) *double-voting mafia goons, with daychat, with a special rule (*) on their secret vote that it cannot be on the same target as their actual vote.
-Secret votes are cast by PM, and are included in vote counts, but not who cast it.
-Simple majority of the maximum votes on a player are needed to lynch...so that's 4 day1 (7 vote max on any given player), and could be something different on later days depending on how things play out.
Otherwise this runs as per normal mafia rules.
At a basic level, if town can recognize their fellow member, then they can lynch scum, and protect each other at night while killing the remaining 2 scum. If they vote for their fellow townie, scum can quick-hammer and win. Scum can pretend to have double-voting powers by coordinating secret votes, but they cannot lynch town unless the townie helps.
There are a variety of situations that could come up depending on what combination of lynch/no-lynch and night kills happens.
Seems like this one's likely to be a quick one as the first night should effectively decide the game.
-
Seems like this one's likely to be a quick one as the first night should effectively decide the game.
Yeah, it's essentially in the same vein as the Save the Princess game. Although there are a couple possibilities where day2 would matter.
i.e. players T1, T2, M1, M2, M3. Suppose M3 is lynched day1.
Then T1 protects T2, T2 protects M1, and T1/T2 both shoot M2, while M2 shoots T2.
Then day2 would be T1, T2, M1 alive, and the two townies need to decide to lynch M1 to win.
This might be grossly weighted towards scum...I haven't worked out any probabilities. I just like that it's closer to a straight mafia game with power roles :)