-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Right, so it seems that optimal strategy for this game is going to be forming alliances with people early game, getting specific items in a "pack" to maximize options/item usage, then backstabbing as numbers get winnowed down.
To be honest that doesn't sound half bad as a one shot thing for a change of pace.
Wait, what do you mean "whoever survive the lynch wins"? Do you mean that hunting stops when there's 3 or less people and the game goes on until there's only one left?
But then how do you pick a winner between the last two? That's your true endgame then.
Or did you mean that when there's three, there's one last lynch and the last two win together?
The latter. Current tentative plan:
3-1 lynch- 2 survivors win
Tie-1 survivors wins.
4 people- 1 lynch, 1 hunt- 2 people win
A tie and a hunt- 1 person wins.
So 1 or 2 people win.
3-1 lynch- 2 survivors win
Tie-1 survivors wins.
4 people- 1 lynch, 1 hunt- 2 people win
A tie and a hunt- 1 person wins.
So 1 or 2 people win.
Ah, but if there are three people left, and those people are working together, then they just know that somebody is going to be betrayed. What's to stop them from chain brutalling each other?
Three people left. One of them has the Ring of Popularity. He's just going to pick the other winner, isn't he?
Three people left. Two of them have a Ring of Popularity. Third guy is just shafted?
Three people left. All have a Ring. Now what?
How do you make these situations interesting and tense?
OR
What rules are put in play to avoid these situations?
Three people left. Two of them have a Ring of Popularity. Third guy is just shafted?
Three people left. All have a Ring. Now what?
How do you make these situations interesting and tense?
OR
What rules are put in play to avoid these situations?