This is a discussion on Mafia Large: GAME OF THRONES game thread: Cersei Lannister Win . within the Past Games forums, part of the Mafia category; Originally Posted by Because_why_not It's also a bit of an insult to the competency of your team to say to ...
A possible problem is when a Neutral player gets Isolated, as they don't have the ability to give their gold to their allies. A possible solution would be making Preventive Action one gold cheaper for Neutral players.
The wincon to me seemed more like eliminating other alliances before they eliminate yours.
Having alliances around the same size would be more fair imo, because then the teams can actually use skill/strategies to win instead of taking advantage of their numbers. MD would become pointless maybe, but at least a player can't win the way desthro did xD
I think equal sized alliances would be a natural occurrence once players understand the game well enough. You've seen now what happens when there is a giant alliance: one player snatches the win, because they get the opportunity to do so. I would expect that if the game was run again with the same players, there would be more smaller alliances to prevent the same thing from happening.Having alliances around the same size would be more fair imo, because then the teams can actually use skill/strategies to win instead of taking advantage of their numbers. MD would become pointless maybe, but at least a player can't win the way desthro did xD
I do wonder what would've happened if in an alternate timeline, Des was killed off by the other team but everything else lead up to the same scenario, just minus him (I know that's unlikely just because of the butterfly effect, but still for thought). That's because I had, and the others showed, no intention of wanting a solo win at the cost of the others. I think we would've won as a big group (I guess in this alternate timeline, we couldn't bring back Des though).
I think if the game was run again, I wouldn't play it, not because there's anything wrong with it, but more that it isn't for me (the classic "it's not you, it's me" spiel lol). I'm just not someone who can backstab or want a solo win at the cost of my team. I don't know reading the QTs from earlier in the game people were on the fence with trusting me, and I even joked about purposely allying someone, only to backstab them, then bring them back just to backstab them again, but like I said, that's actually the opposite of the real me.
I think it's a lot worse to lose because of one member of your team taking the win for themselves, then simply losing to another team for whatever reason (even including dodgy game balance and mechanics).
But yeah don't get me wrong because I did enjoy the game, I just don't think I'll go for this setup again.
Agreed, i can't do this set up
I wasn't going to sign up for pretty much this reason, but I'm never ok with backstabbing
I admit that I was pretty shocked at the backstabbing option. I never considered using it. I did have a great team and no reason to backstab any of them. Even if I didn't, I would express disagreement, but I would never backstab. I'm always super loyal to my team and guess that's just a personality trait that I cannot override, no matter what the reward may be. If it stays, I would make it extremely expensive to use.
I'm against limiting the size of the alliances. The thing is, sure, the bigger the alliance the stronger they are in terms of gold and such, but also the more fragile they are. The more people you have to factor in the more loyalty you have to be assured of. I was super surprised how much everyone in my group was trusting of each other (minus Desthro :P) because I didn't expect that trust to be maintained for such a large group of people.
I don't know if I would limit the size of the alliance but I think that I would make large alliances more expensive to form because, if you're going to crush the smaller alliance, you should have to pay something for that opportunity.
(p = players, a = alliances) Basically, the amount of gold you have to pay to close the loop in each case still increases by 3n each time you add another player. So a 3 player alliance would have to spend 9 gold to fully ally but an 8 player alliance would have to spend 84G just to close the loop and have them all connected. Even accounting for gifting money, that is a *lot* and extremely difficult without help from stuff like rez 5 and the loan shark perk.
(Excuse the probably bad maths but it shouldn't be too wrong)