Posted December 12, 2024
• Balance: 6 Catholics vs 3 Reformers might still favor Catholics due to the heavy information flow and the gradual creation of a large, confirmed “town voice.”
• Length and Complexity: The unanimous decision and stumplification mechanic might drag the game out.
• Inertia: Lack of night kills or other forced change could lead to stalemates or slow progress.
• Roles: If introduced, roles should be subtle and not disrupt the core mechanic of investigate-to-confirm identities. A Messenger role seems harmless enough, but might not fix any core issues.
Potential Tweaks:
• Consider a smaller player list or a different ratio to give Reformers a better chance. Perhaps 5 Catholics vs 3 Reformers might be more tense.
• Allow for a timed mechanic (like after X number of investigations, a forced decision must be reached) to avoid endless stalemates.
• Keep roles minimal or purely communicative, so as not to derail the delicate balance.
In conclusion, the concept is intriguing and creative, but the main risks are prolonged stalemates, a tilt in balance towards the Catholics due to easier accumulation of trustworthy stumps, and potential for player fatigue. If you move forward, consider careful adjustment of the ratio, or introduce a small mechanism to ensure the game progresses toward a conclusion.
However, the stalemate and dragging on concern is a valid one. Perhaps we should use Investigation deadlines. How about one of these:
1. if at a set deadline no majority for an Investigation is reached, a random player is investigated
2. if at a set deadline no majority is reached, the Reformers get to decide who is investigated in their secret chat. This would give the Reformers faction more power. It would lead to an increased incentive to vote for the Catholics, but it would also be an incentive to the Reformers to generate Stalemates (which, in turn, might give them awas). In any case it would change dynamics.
3. if at a set deadline no absolute majority is reached, a simple majority suffices. I.e. the players with the highest number of investigation votes on them are investigated, even it the number doesn't amount to more than half the remaining voters. - This has the lowest impact on the game balance, I think, but it allows the Reformers to win on inactivity as long as the leading number of investigation votes is on a Town player.
What do you think? What kind of deadline do you want?
