new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

1 Seer (with a random n0 villager peek)
7 Villagers

1 Sorceror (with a random n0 non-seer peek)
2 Wolves


about the sorceror:

the wolves don't know who the sorceror is, the sorceror doesn't know who the wolves are. Sorceror peeks each night for the seer. Gets a seer/not seer result each night. Wins with wolves. Will die if the wolves kill him. The sorceror does NOT have to be lynched for the village to win.


sorceror doesn't have to peek as villager, but that's how they do it in BGG. I think sorceror peeking as sorceror is fine though

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

or if people don't like the sorceror

1 seer, no n0 peek
8 villagers

1 roleblocker
1 wolf

elegant and slightly more balanced

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

how about what we do now, but the wolves get 24/7 chat?

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

24/7 chat is surprisingly useless

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

luckay, just try it out some time, mod the next time one is going. if i was around id be happy to play alternate structures

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

8 villagers
2 wolves
1 angel

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
8 villagers
2 wolves
1 angel

[/ QUOTE ]
solid

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

I like an evil seer more than an angel.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

If you want an interesting 11, try this:

2 wolves
1 sorceror

1 seer
7 villagers

Seer and sorc both see full roles, and both get a n0.

The sorc being able to find out who the wolves are could be surprisingly useful...

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

And it probably extends to 15 as well...

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

villagers already lose a lot of 11s...the sorceror just removes a lynch before must lynch

8v3
6v3
4v3

villagers get 2 mislynches

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

2 "and a half" wolves, 2 "and a half" mislynches...

I'm guessing the reason why village loses 11s is because of the no n0...

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
2 "and a half" wolves, 2 "and a half" mislynches...

I'm guessing the reason why village loses 11s is because of the no n0...

[/ QUOTE ]You can't have half a mislynch. And for a solid wolf it's probably much easier to kill a non-power villager than it is to hit the sorc by accident.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

Personally I waver on the current 11er format. If we assume the 9er is balanced, whether the 11er is balanced depends on whether these two factors balance out:

a) The villagers get an extra lynch

b) The wolves get a shot at the seer before he gets a peek

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
1 Seer (with a random n0 villager peek)
7 Villagers

1 Sorceror (with a random n0 non-seer peek)
2 Wolves

[/ QUOTE ]I've decide I don't like random n0 villager peeks, because they probably are pro-village on the balance. With that rule, it's statistically much easier to give credible seer cover. Being able to ALWAYS hint a villager n0 is so much safer and easier than having to hint wolves their fair share of the time.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

Thoughts on just making the first peek a random villager?

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

im pretty sure village wins most 11s by the way

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 Seer (with a random n0 villager peek)
7 Villagers

1 Sorceror (with a random n0 non-seer peek)
2 Wolves

[/ QUOTE ]I've decide I don't like random n0 villager peeks, because they probably are pro-village on the balance. With that rule, it's statistically much easier to give credible seer cover. Being able to ALWAYS hint a villager n0 is so much safer and easier than having to hint wolves their fair share of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Trust me Neil. You're wrong.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 Seer (with a random n0 villager peek)
7 Villagers

1 Sorceror (with a random n0 non-seer peek)
2 Wolves

[/ QUOTE ]I've decide I don't like random n0 villager peeks, because they probably are pro-village on the balance. With that rule, it's statistically much easier to give credible seer cover. Being able to ALWAYS hint a villager n0 is so much safer and easier than having to hint wolves their fair share of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Trust me Neil. You're wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]Care to be more specific? This isn't a game of werewolf you know.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

it helps the seer a little, but it helps the wolves ALOT to know they won't be peeked until day 3

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
it helps the seer a little, but it helps the wolves ALOT to know they won't be peeked until day 3

[/ QUOTE ]Fair enough.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
1 Seer (with a random n0 villager peek)
7 Villagers

1 Sorceror (with a random n0 non-seer peek)
2 Wolves


about the sorceror:

the wolves don't know who the sorceror is, the sorceror doesn't know who the wolves are. Sorceror peeks each night for the seer. Gets a seer/not seer result each night. Wins with wolves. Will die if the wolves kill him. The sorceror does NOT have to be lynched for the village to win.


sorceror doesn't have to peek as villager, but that's how they do it in BGG. I think sorceror peeking as sorceror is fine though

[/ QUOTE ]
No way I play anything coming from BGG because it's supposed to be more balanced, DYSW?
p.s. didn't we have like a big count by mets which showed that the 11ers as we play them are more or less 50%? Or were there so few 11ers that it didn't matter?

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

wasnt by me. I think 11ers as they stand now are a huge advantage for the village

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
No way I play anything coming from BGG because it's supposed to be more balanced, DYSW?

[/ QUOTE ]

this isn't by bgg
I just took a bgg role and balanced it into our current 11-player

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

How does 2 wolves, 1 seer, 7 villagers, and 1 miller sound?

lol millage

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

candlestick maker ftw

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

3 wolves
5 villagers
3 serial killers
Let the LOL commence!

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
24/7 chat is surprisingly useless

[/ QUOTE ]

Especially when one of the wolves does not have AIM.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
3 wolves
5 villagers
1 serial killer
1 ninja
1 FGP
Let the LOL commence!

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

Maybe in turbos 24/7 chat is useless... have to say, it was a lifesaver for clown and me in the long game that just ended.

It gave us time to - for instance - make a conscious decision on the second-to-last day whether I should throw clowntable under the bus with a 4-2 vote or commit the outcome of the game to a coinflip (and we decided the coinflip was the better chance of winning.)

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

Actually, 3 wolves, 3 villagers and FIVE NINJAS ZOMG! Make it so that every player who gets ninja'd in thread (their post sandwiched between two posts by the same ninja) dies.

There you go, Herbie, there's your game to run. Gogogogogo!

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
3 wolves
5 villagers
1 serial killer
1 ninja
1 FGP
Let the LOL commence!

[/ QUOTE ]
No I actually kinda want to run this game - I have no idea if it would be balanced but it would be funny

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3 wolves
5 villagers
1 serial killer
1 ninja
1 FGP
Let the LOL commence!

[/ QUOTE ]
No I actually kinda want to run this game - I have no idea if it would be balanced but it would be funny

[/ QUOTE ]

it'd be incredibly imbalanced, lol

-2 villagers
+2 seers

perhaps

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

FGP role please.

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3 wolves
5 villagers
1 serial killer
1 ninja
1 FGP
Let the LOL commence!

[/ QUOTE ]
No I actually kinda want to run this game - I have no idea if it would be balanced but it would be funny

[/ QUOTE ]

it'd be incredibly imbalanced, lol

-2 villagers
+2 seers

perhaps

[/ QUOTE ]
You think? remember wolves could nightkill wolves in this setup because of the ninja.......maybe -2 villagers +1 seer +1 angel?

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

How about this?

2 wolves
1 cultist
3 villagers
1 seer
1 angel
1 ninja (pro-village)
1 FGP (neutral)
1 serial killer (neutral)

FGP and serial killer both have last man standing win conditions but if it's just the two of them then FGP>SK

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
How does 2 wolves, 1 seer, 7 villagers, and 1 miller sound?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds fun. Better if the miller thinks he's a villager, though...

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

cultists are awesome and should be included in every game fwiw

also, 11ers are seriously rigged in favor of the village and im for doing away with the seer in place of an angel

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How does 2 wolves, 1 seer, 7 villagers, and 1 miller sound?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds fun. Better if the miller thinks he's a villager, though...

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah the miller is told he is a villager, but peeks evil

If the miller knows he's a miller, it's like a confirmed villager, and is +village ev

Re: new proposed 11 player turbo format
 

[ QUOTE ]
cultists are awesome and should be included in every game fwiw

also, 11ers are seriously rigged in favor of the village and im for doing away with the seer in place of an angel

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like any idea that involves messing up kills so that the playerlist isn't always odd (angels, vig/serial/martyr kills), because it takes away from the simple elegance of a turbo [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]