Non-playing suicide

[Amer]

Nov 26, 2013 3:59:55 GMT -8 Evan said:

But won't people just vote out the most active & suspicious non-immunity winner? "Hey Amer didn't win immunity this week, we'd better get him out now while we have the chance."

Also feels like I'd have to switch to giving out one immunity eventually, otherwise spies could conceivably hide in the top half every week?

I think it'd be better if I just said "if you don't vote for 2 elections, you get booted"

Well, yes. That's what we want. People should vote for suspicious people, and suspicious people will fight to win the challenge each week. That's a hell of a lot better than just killing people who talk a lot. Also, the spies have to kill someone in the non-immune pool, and they will want to kill the least suspicious people, because that's in their best interest.

You don't have to reduce the number of immunities given out. The number of immunities automatically decreases each week. You're also assuming the spies can win the challenge each week. Still, you could just eliminate the immunity altogether when you get down to maybe 6 players.

If you just auto-kill people who don't participate, you still have the problem where strong, consistent players get killed early because everyone sees active players as suspicious.

Nov 26, 2013 13:18:31 GMT -8 Evan said:

My mom and i talked about Mildville for a few hours today, we came up with this twist on Amer's good idea:
Three teams: Team A team B and team spy.
Team A is half the players, Team B is half the plYers. Team spy is mixed in with Team A and Team B.
The goal as usual is to eliminate everyone not on your team. Each week team a and b compete and the loser had to vote someone out, also there is a spy kill every week.

I think this provides a lot of emphasis on voting out non players.

What does everyone think?

You still have people who will be targeted because they're active, because people will want to take out the spies, not to mention the spies taking out the stronger players.

[Evan]

Mmmm... I disagree . If my team loses because some chumps didnt participate and now i gotta vote someone off, Im gunningtowards those losers who held me down. In the end its your team that has to win, and getting out a nonplyer is better strategy than aiming for a player one thinks is a spy

[Amer]

If you were the only one playing, it would probably be alright. Never assume the players will think logically.

Even if you were right, if the losing team always kills off the inactives on their team, how is that furthering the goal of killing the spies? At some point, the diplomats have to focus on killing spies — that's the whole point. After 5 weeks, you'll have killed off 5 inactives, and the spies will have killed off 5 strong diplomats, and no one will have targeted a potential spy.

I think it's important to protect strong/consistent players. It doesn't make for a good game when the only people playing at the end are a bunch of non-players. I mean, look at this game. After the spies kill True this week, what's left? Erik and Fatty are going to lead a bunch of mutes to victory?

[Evan]

True and I held a four day summit where we tinkered with the rules for next season. Here's the current plan, feel more than free to shoot holes in it, that's how this works:
Three teams: Team A team B and team spy.
Team A is half the players, Team B is half the players. Team spy is mixed in with Team A and Team B.
The goal as usual is to eliminate everyone not on your team. Each week team a and b compete in a group challenge. The challenge will reward teams who have a high % of participants. The loser had to vote someone out, also there is a spy kill every week. We are pretty certain this format will encourage the rapid elimination of non-players. One key element is I won't tell people how many spies are on each team, there could be zero on one team, I think that will keep teams from focusing on eliminating spies first.

Then, when the two teams reach some sort of ratio (2:1 probably) they merge. There is now only team diplomat and team spy.

THEN when only one team remains, individual competition starts. It'll be like Big Brother or Survivor, with an individual immunity each week. When it gets down to the final 2, everybody votes on a winner.