LOTR: Return of the King (GAME THREAD)

[sighing]

[ QUOTE ]
That looks about right.

If I ran this game, I would've given Gandalf double-vote instead of seering, and I think that would still be village balanced (though less so, obviously).

And yes, good wolves can level, but really, mouth of sauron is worth less than a normal wolf (and it's not close).

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the Mouth of Sauron was (intentionally) worth less than a normal wolf.

Otherwise, Gandalf/Aragorn/Frodo/Sam had consistent roles across the trilogy (as did Sauron, with minor variations, and the Witch-King), and there was no reason to change that.

[sighing]

Btw, most people who think it's easy to design one of these things in balance go and run one and then it ends on Day 4 in a blowout [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That looks about right.

If I ran this game, I would've given Gandalf double-vote instead of seering, and I think that would still be village balanced (though less so, obviously).

And yes, good wolves can level, but really, mouth of sauron is worth less than a normal wolf (and it's not close).

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the Mouth of Sauron was (intentionally) worth less than a normal wolf.

Otherwise, Gandalf/Aragorn/Frodo/Sam had consistent roles across the trilogy (as did Sauron, with minor variations, and the Witch-King), and there was no reason to change that.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, in all 3 games, make Gandalf double-vote instead of seer, and you have probably better games (though probably more wolf walks because village really sucked in this series).

[lastchance]

Durron, 4 or 5 points is like a wolf or a seer.

That's still a freaking lot.

[sighing]

Hopefully nobody's tweaking power lists here in the expectation that I'm reading them and taking notes [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
Durron, 4 or 5 points is like a wolf or a seer.

That's still a freaking lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah but it's not THREE wolves

lol

[sighing]

If all the people playing had put this much effort into actually playing, that would've changed the game quite a bit.

There were some people who put a lot of effort into it, but there were a number who didn't. Why is this thread only exploding with content after the game ends?

I'm not really going to rush out and do another one of these.

[clowntable]

[ QUOTE ]
If all the people playing had put this much effort into actually playing, that would've changed the game quite a bit.

There were some people who put a lot of effort into it, but there were a number who didn't. Why is this thread only exploding with content after the game ends?

I'm not really going to rush out and do another one of these.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely. I think overall (not giving names etc.) village played this game quite badly and lazy. There is like 0% zurvan should get lynched twice for example. He gave all the reasons why this was so horrible by village in thread already.
Herbie, I think you played very well in the end but with the way village played this game I would have but way more emphasis on emotion than on logic. I felt like a couple of the villagers that were still alive had a feeling of "i'm kind of sad i helped lynch so many villagers" so I would have pushed the "wow, another lynch like zurvan" pretty hard.

p.s.: I think i played pretty badly and I think that Mark actually played extremly well. He might have been close to 100% wrong but at least he put up reasonable arguments, was willing to reevaluate new informationetc. wich cannot be said about every villager.

p.p.s.: Amazing job sigh just ignore the nay sayers. Who cares if it's really 100% balanced, we had a pretty good shot I think.

[HerbieGRD]

Sighing - I agree with your comments about lack of participation. I also believe that we should have won this game and any complaints about balance are silly - I can think of 3-4 different spots where we could have won this game and unfortunately for us villagers made good decisions in key spots. VR is the perfect example - she wasn't right much this game but she was right a couple of times when it counted. I also don't think we played exceptionally well as a team - I don't blame balance issues for us losing this game at all.

F the haters - I love the games you run and would gladly play in another and anyone complaining about balance after the fact (especially if you didn't play) should STFU