Blacjak

Gunslingers- Signups

Recommended Posts

If Traj had shot Zil at any time earlier than 2am he would have won with Zil who didn't need to survive to win. By assuming she would die from Sinical, and waiting until the end of the cycle to ensure she died, he lost. The innocents also ensured they would lose on High Noon 7 by doing literally nothing, other than Traj discovering he was not able to affect the sniper, and allowing Sinical and Rift to die without a fight. There were many different ways the game could have played out, but I think the reinforcement of incorrect assumptions about baddie powers and numbers was what won the Ruffians the game. Deputy Deputy weeenuyasha Grift was definitely the MVP.

And yes, Lion wasn't a silent shooter, but a sniper. His shots were the loudest in the game which I hinted at in plot, but he was far away and so couldn't be seen making the shot or affect any other powers.

Traj didn't use his power to protect players, instead trying to use it to specifically see when a player shot which would only be useful in the case where the sniper could be affected by it, or redirecting baddie fire onto himself if he didn't know who they would target. The defensive first half of his power was far better because it disabled the action and revealed the triggering player. I really liked this role because it was a protection with a cost. I do like that Traj was able to figure out a different application for the power, but unfortunately was wrong about his assumption. Also if the concensus was that the "silent shot" was an Ability then it wouldn't be a shot at all.

In the Rules I mention many times that there might be Abilities that alter or are not subject to each particular Rule.

Rift did a good job I think, but he ran out of resources when he wasn't supported. The other route he could have gone was to be passive and focus solely on generating Fame to get more heals off, but I think the Fortune generation is better since a buying a Vest costs mechanically 9 Fame and it is less likely for a player to have a Vest than be at full HP. Plus it allows for a burst of protection to be more effective, as seen when Rift saved Sinical.

Contrary to what was said, Thief was the strongest Ability in the game. In a resource game you have to consider relative power based on currency. Thief costs 3 Fame, but generates 5, 10, or 15 Fortune in value. 3 Fame is roughly equal to 5 Fortune. So each time the ability is used it creates a 3-15 Fame shift in power (6-3, 18-3) since the innocents lose the same power the baddies gain. This is regardless of other Abilities that also generate currency.

Oh and yes, Rex could have become a public Sheriff after Sinical died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops. My bad for losing the game, then - I guess I shouldn't have trusted the MC when he told me my traps would catch "any shot". Oh well. I wasn't aware my traps were a protect until I ended up saving Rift late in the game, either - I thought I was a more active watcher that would stop abilities as opposed to attacks. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I got asked to be a replacement, I was considering posting that everyone should just shoot Zilary and lion, because they were either low-resource innocents or sneaky baddies. When I took over for Inu, I was very, very glad I hadn't suggested that (and then I shot Zilary anyway because I was worried doing anything else would be out of character).

I also thought Blacjak had a pretty great way of preventing a mass-roleclaim - half the players in the game wanted to kill specific other players, which meant that half the players in the game probably also thought someone specifically wanted to kill them.

It does seem like Traj's ability should have been reworded to emphasize its protection and non-absoluteness, but he actually came close to winning along with the rest of us anyway (I was wondering whether the Ruffians would let Zilary die, since survival wasn't one of her win conditions). If he'd been innocent instead of neutral, I think the confusion would have been a much bigger problem.

Sinical, was it something Inu did to convince you he was innocent, or was it something I did? I was really surprised to receive that second deputization, but I obviously wasn't going to complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, weee5067 said:

I also thought Blacjak had a pretty great way of preventing a mass-roleclaim - half the players in the game wanted to kill specific other players, which meant that half the players in the game probably also thought someone specifically wanted to kill them.

Wasn't this all based off of role names? Or were powers also included? Once that started coming out, I thought claiming only powers (which is the truly important thing anyway) would have still worked out. Props to Blacjak for including three baddies and two(?) specific-condition neutrals to balance out for this.

I haven't read over the full role/power list, but it seems like Blacjak designed this game much better than I had ever suspected. Some needed clarification here and there is always a fault in Werewolf, but the overarching design seems like it was much better thought out than expected. I didn't expect to say that walking away from a game that started with a confirmed innocent.

Edit: Actually, going to give extra kudos considering the low player count too.

Edited by Shattered Rift

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The win conditions were based off of role names, but I think the role names definitely hinted at abilities ("Lightning" turned out to be a player who always won tie duels, and I don't think it would have been hard to figure out that the Shaman was a healer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again, Wee, for stepping in for me. You left me in a better position than I would have been if I had kept going.

With our win conditions essentially being neutral win conditions rather than villain win conditions, coupled with the way other players were working together and Rex being a definite neutral, I was thinking when I asked Rex about it that it might be a game full of neutrals with the Sheriff as the lone innocent that was far more powerful than the rest of us and who had to set us against each other to win. Some things said by Rift shattered that idea, and then Rock confirmed the existence of innocents, but it is interesting how many non-conflicting win conditions there were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, weee5067 said:

Before I got asked to be a replacement, I was considering posting that everyone should just shoot Zilary and lion, because they were either low-resource innocents or sneaky baddies. When I took over for Inu, I was very, very glad I hadn't suggested that (and then I shot Zilary anyway because I was worried doing anything else would be out of character).

I also thought Blacjak had a pretty great way of preventing a mass-roleclaim - half the players in the game wanted to kill specific other players, which meant that half the players in the game probably also thought someone specifically wanted to kill them.

Not going to lie: instantly shooting Zilary was a brilliant move. It was the only thing that prevented me from (attempting to) pushing shots on you day of replacement. I even kept my argument wind up, which was my current thought process before you claimed the shot was against Zilary, in my post. Honestly, it kept you out of the front of my mind as a baddie candidate until endgame (at which point I was like "innocents have no chance, abandon ship, abandon ship").

I actually disagree with this on a personal level, since my goal was an extra nudge in favor of that mass roleclaim idea I put forward (also, by the way, I still think it would have been much better for innocents than for baddies).

Also, I'm going to take a moment to publicly apologize to the innocents (even if they don't deserve it :P) for letting what was (sorry Inu, but I can't think of a better term to use, and I understand there were reasons for it) more or less a Werewolf version of a temper tantrum force me off a line of valid analysis. It's something I don't usually do, and I feel like if I was truly innocent (e.g., survival not required for a win), I wouldn't have done that, but I played more defensively than usual. I do wonder how much of Inu's responses were not genuine (i.e. if any of it was intended as a tactic to dissuade me).

I haven't looked at the set-up (I may tomorrow when I'm not quite so tired), but at a naive examination, I don't really understand how 3/3/3 is a balanced set-up for innocents (the Sheriff only has 2/8 good deputy targets, which is less than the 3/8 objectively bad deputy targets).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to try and argue innocents deserved to win, but I can't see how we were meant to.

Other than that, sorry for playing so awfully. Going to be taking a break for a bit, I don't have anywhere near the motivation to be playing at a reasonable level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rexozord said:

Also, I'm going to take a moment to publicly apologize to the innocents (even if they don't deserve it :P) for letting what was (sorry Inu, but I can't think of a better term to use, and I understand there were reasons for it) more or less a Werewolf version of a temper tantrum force me off a line of valid analysis.

That "tantrum" was a long time in coming and would have happened regardless of my alignment. Notice the discussion after last game and the thread I made on enforcing activity. This was an active subject being trampled on. Every word of it was true. You may not have intended to attack activity, but that was at the core of your argument, and I wasn't the only one who took "activity is evil" from what you were saying. I've been executed way too many times for actually playing the game, unlike the majority. Before anyone throws idiotic confirmation bias on this, the exact opposite - going after inactivity instead of activity, would have caught all the Ruffians who had to kill someone to win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, InuyashaOhki said:

That "tantrum" was a long time in coming and would have happened regardless of my alignment. Notice the discussion after last game and the thread I made on enforcing activity. This was an active subject being trampled on. Every word of it was true. You may not have intended to attack activity, but that was at the core of your argument, and I wasn't the only one who took "activity is evil" from what you were saying. I've been executed way too many times for actually playing the game, unlike the majority. Before anyone throws idiotic confirmation bias on this, the exact opposite - going after inactivity instead of activity, would have caught all the Ruffians who had to kill someone to win. 

Ok, let's hash this out a little bit. If "attack[ing] activity [...] was at the core of [my] argument", it was only that way because any sort of post-content analysis requires, you know, actual post content to analyze. Outside of that requirement, my argument was fundamentally unrelated to how active you were. So unless we're willing to discard all post-content analysis (which, by the way, post-content analysis also led to my suspicions of Cel), I think dismissing my argument as an attack on activity is unfair. The fact that others thought my argument was an attack on activity merely shows that I was unsuccessful in explaining/clarifying my argument when I first made it. Although the only person I recall saying this was Weee (whereas Cel disagreed with my conclusion outright, unrelated to any sort of activity argumentation, IIRC).

Also it's hard to say that I'm basing my analysis (generally, or have some bias) on activity when I was vocally suspicious of both Zilary and Lion as well. Heck, I was suspicious of Traj at first when he was inactive and then became unsuspicious of him once he started being active.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue was, you weren't going after Inu for an action or game-related decision, you were focusing just on the fact that he'd posted and not said what you thought he should have. That's an attack on activity because Inu could have completely avoided your suspicion by just not posting. You didn't point a finger at anyone else who hadn't provided the analysis you wanted, just at the one person who was providing any analysis at all. That's a really good way to discourage activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Inu didn't post, that would've been uncharacteristic of him and make him more suspicious!

Interestingly, behavior & personality analysis is one of Inu's strongest talents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the thread, there are 2 others (Rock and Cel) who also came away from your analysis with the impression that you were attacking activity. Cel and Rift also made their own attacks on activity. I am not saying you intentionally were trying to suppress activity, but it was at the core of the argument you were making.

I dropped the subject because I was getting too upset over it before, and I was trying to let it rest until you called it a "tantrum" here. I am NOT going to hash it out with you now for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Blacjak for hosting such a well-designed game. What I have read on the roles and how win conditions were not necessarily correlated with survival, I thought was good. Also, Traj's powers were interesting that he was able to find another use for it, and I thought the other roles were very well thought out. Also, I enjoyed your implementation of encouraging activity by gaining bullets/power through posts mechanic.

As for my team of Weeenuyasha and Lion, I thought it was helpful to have one of the more vocal players on the team since I know me and Lion tend to not post as much in werewolf games in general. I don't know if that was done intentionally or not, but I appreciate your setup to push us generally less-active players to post more. I understand that playing werewolf is to play to win and in this game, you had to post more. However, I am not usually that competitive. I like to play werewolf just to play and that's fun for me as is...winning is a bonus, but I'm okay if I don't win. I did feel like this game challenged me to be more active than I usually am, so that's good.

The other thing I found interesting was that my goal was to shoot Lightning and that was Cel...a player in WW who I would regularly be in contact with if we were allowed to have PMs. Again, not sure if it was intentional or not, but I found it amusing.

I agree that if the innocents would have started shooting more early on, it would be likely that the Ruffians would have lost. A lot of circumstances happened in our favor, such as Cel and Fox's duel and the silent shooter being pinpointed on me to protect Lion. If I died by Sinical's revenge shot (which I wasn't the final killer of Sinical anyway), I would have still completed my goal. I don't know how I was able to survive as long as I did. Surely, I thought I would die 2 HIgh Noons before the end of the game (and thus, I try to funnel a couple of my resources to my teammates), but alas.

Anyway, it was a fun game and I enjoyed it quite a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will note that some of the hesitation to shoot probably came from so many non-baddies having neutral win conditions. It was almost certainly in the innocents' best interest to shoot early, but probably not in Traj's, Rex's, or Cel's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now