"Wld u lk 2 ply a gme?" dead thread

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

By voting for Richard.

Your win condition was "survivor", wasn't it?

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 14:56

The win condition changed. I'm guessing the change may not have been spotted.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

When was that?

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 14:57

Mr Dave wrote:

You had simon and holly in the lights with 2 votes, and Richard also on 2, simon was first so took precidence over Holly. A vote for Richard would've put him on three (lit), Simon on 2 (lit) and Holly on 2 (unlit)

Therefore 'safe'

If you say so, I wasn't sure on the order between simon and holly, and I wasn't prepared to take the risk that Holly would get got instead of simon.

MAlc

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 14:59

Craster wrote:

When was that?

After night 1.
But as Gaywood said, we're not especially worried. The next thing is for the altrustic innocents that just voted themselves out decided if the won or not themselves

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:00

Craster wrote:

By voting for Richard.

Your win condition was "survivor", wasn't it?

"You win if over half the innocents survive" plus in the rules I had "You may not vote for yourself."

Nothing about revealing my role, or not asking people to vote for me.

Malc

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:00

Malc wrote:

Mr Dave wrote:

You had simon and holly in the lights with 2 votes, and Richard also on 2, simon was first so took precidence over Holly. A vote for Richard would've put him on three (lit), Simon on 2 (lit) and Holly on 2 (unlit)

Therefore 'safe'

If you say so, I wasn't sure on the order between simon and holly, and I wasn't prepared to take the risk that Holly would get got instead of simon.

MAlc

With 3 on two, you could probably vote/unvote various people to get the outcome you wanted, and kept an eye on the counter.

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:01

Malc wrote:

in the rules I had "You may not vote for yourself."

We forgot all about that rule, which broke our masterplan, which was for you to vote for yourself and escape.

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:02

Mr Dave wrote:

Malc wrote:

Mr Dave wrote:

You had simon and holly in the lights with 2 votes, and Richard also on 2, simon was first so took precidence over Holly. A vote for Richard would've put him on three (lit), Simon on 2 (lit) and Holly on 2 (unlit)

Therefore 'safe'

If you say so, I wasn't sure on the order between simon and holly, and I wasn't prepared to take the risk that Holly would get got instead of simon.

MAlc

With 3 on two, you could probably vote/unvote various people to get the outcome you wanted, and kept an eye on the counter.

there was only a couple of minutes left, also when I posted my "unable to save" comment, holly was on 4, and not 2.

Malc

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:02

Malc wrote:

Craster wrote:

By voting for Richard.

Your win condition was "survivor", wasn't it?

"You win if over half the innocents survive" plus in the rules I had "You may not vote for yourself."

Nothing about revealing my role, or not asking people to vote for me.

Malc

Check the role alteration PM. First line.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

Grim... wrote:

Well, this is interesting.
It's against the Hackers's win condition (selfish innocent, get out alive at all costs), but, well, there's nothing we're going to do about that now.

What happened to this then?

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:04

Mr Dave wrote:

Malc wrote:

Craster wrote:

By voting for Richard.

Your win condition was "survivor", wasn't it?

"You win if over half the innocents survive" plus in the rules I had "You may not vote for yourself."

Nothing about revealing my role, or not asking people to vote for me.

Malc

Check the role alteration PM. First line.

Shit, I did not notice that!

Malc

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

Heh - So malc was a vig turned SK who thought he was still a vig.

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:05

Craster wrote:

Heh - So malc was a vig turned SK who thought he was still a vig.

I just thought I had gained the option of killing during the day (I was still trying to kill the baddies, even though I was doing such a bad job!)

Malc

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:07

Craster wrote:

Heh - So malc was a vig turned SK who thought he was still a vig.

Sort of. The original message was

Quote:

You are a Hacker: sure, you're frightened, but there's things you can do here. You know how computers work and this smartphone has discovered a secured WiFi network. It's password protected, but you can work around that; beyond that you find a control network for the trap boxes you are all stuck in. It'll take a while to break the codes, but once per night you can trigger the trap for any person you choose, killing them. You win if over half the innocents survive.

We changed it to

Quote:

You're getting more scared, there's no way to save everyone. You don't want to die! You just need to think about yourself. Your win condition is now survive.

Also, you've got this system more figured out now. You've penetrated a few layers of security. You just need to concentrate to hack the final layer around each cage. At any time, day or night, a PM to the GMs means you start the hacking process. It could take a few hours or maybe less. At the end of the hack, your chosen target drops to their death.

However, you cannot SMS from the phone without interrupting your cracking code, so any posting during the time will reset the counter until the hacking works. You can also only do this once per day/night cycle, because each time you drop somone the system will change all the other crypto keys and you'll have to spend some time getting back through the outer security layers.

Remember that if you kill a target during the day, they will be removed from the vote record.

kalmar · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:27

"that's really not very funny" - L-LOL

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:28

We'll let them out in a bit.

kalmar · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:29

Mr Dave wrote:

zaphod79 wrote:

I think rufus is sgd .

Care to bet?

I thought it was Runcle!

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:37

Any other bets as to who is who?

It's interesting to sewe how well the personalities are hidden.
(I'd say there's at least one still unrevealed that is showing fairly obvious signs.)

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:38

I'll make a bet

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:40

Grim... wrote:

I'll make a bet

Not you

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Mr Dave wrote:

Grim... wrote:

I'll make a bet

Not you

What about betting against the Doc ? :-)

I know one person but thats it , and i suppose i might speculate on 12345678

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:43

zaphod79 wrote:

Mr Dave wrote:

Grim... wrote:

I'll make a bet

Not you

What about betting against the Doc ? :-)

I may stand a better chance there

Quote:

I know one person but thats it , and i suppose i might speculate on 12345678

Go on then.

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 15:53

We have a couple of WEENARS, Myp and GazChap (clapclapclap).

The rest of you were altrustic innocents, but you left a bunch of people there to (possibly) die.
It is, simply, up to you if you think you (or rather, the character you were playing) has achieved their win condition.

It's interesting to note that none of the selfish characters took the chance to escape.

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Well done to the winners , what was the phreaker ?

And were there any other roles ? (apart from "corpse" - you will act like a corpse and not communicate with anyone else , your win condition is Rot)

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:01

zaphod79 wrote:

Well done to the winners , what was the phreaker ?

And were there any other roles ?

Are, not were. I'll let Runcle tell you what he did(n't)

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Grim... wrote:

zaphod79 wrote:

Well done to the winners , what was the phreaker ?

And were there any other roles ?

Are, not were. I'll let Runcle tell you what he did(n't)

oooooo - sorry if the game is still active then i'll wait :-)

And my guess is he could stop the hacker ?

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:04

zaphod79 wrote:

Grim... wrote:

zaphod79 wrote:

Well done to the winners , what was the phreaker ?

And were there any other roles ?

Are, not were. I'll let Runcle tell you what he did(n't)

oooooo - sorry if the game is still active then i'll wait :-)

You missed out on your chance to guess 38942730.

Yes, I did feel dirty spending much of the game agreeing with him re: everyone not voting.

The Rev Owen · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:09

I still have no idea what's going on. Top game, though.

And I survived. I really hope enough others survive for me to get my win condition.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

It's getting crowded in here now!

Day Five is up.

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:11

The Rev Owen wrote:

I still have no idea what's going on. Top game, though.

And I survived. I really hope enough others survive for me to get my win condition.

viewtopic.php?p=341135#p341135

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

What are you going to do when the cobwebs get too much ?

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:16

Mmm
Since day 2 started, 4 of the 6 have made a total of 2 posts between them.

This could be very very slow.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

Mr Dave wrote:

This could be very very slow.

Keep watching.

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:19

Thank heavens for Gaywoods.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

Grim... wrote:

We have a couple of WEENARS, Myp and GazChap (clapclapclap).

So what was their win condition?

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:20

Survive.

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Can i ask why Mr Dave knows so much about this but did not 'seem' to be playing ?

Or are we just in the endgame here [Vote : Mr Dave]

GazChap · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:32

That was fucking brilliant, to be fair. Great idea you guys. I was sceptical at first but it's so much better than the normal games when you don't know who people are so can't do that whole "brother from another mother" metadata type thing.

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:36

zaphod79 wrote:

Can i ask why Mr Dave knows so much about this but did not 'seem' to be playing ?

Or are we just in the endgame here [Vote : Mr Dave]

You can. I never even signed up to play.

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Mr Dave wrote:

zaphod79 wrote:

Can i ask why Mr Dave knows so much about this but did not 'seem' to be playing ?

Or are we just in the endgame here [Vote : Mr Dave]

You can. I never even signed up to play.

Okay :-)

"Mr Dave , how come you seem to know so much about whats going on here, are you just too awesome for words?"

And I did think you would be in there because of the chance to be unknown

sdg · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:38

Hello! I really enjoyed that, I decided that I was going to act like my character as much as possible and even noticed myself changing the wording of texts a couple of times in an attempt to disguise my identity. I think the format of the game worked really well and the 160 character limit really added an extra dimension and sense of urgency.
As mentioned the lack of avatar made it quite hard to put names to faces but I think my main problem in forming opinions came from the fact that I have only been on via my iPhone or work PC and therefore haven't had a chance to read back and make a mental note of things or comments I have noticed. This has left me in a state of confusion for most of the game but I had decided that this wasn't really an issue while I was acting in the default way I felt my character would act, which was to not vote until we had attempted a day of not voting.
When we got that roleclaim there from Malc and the offer to survive, I was sort of busy but I didn't want to mess it up by not taking part so I ended up just voting without really being sure what was going on. I didn't expect the bad guys to vote in that since in my head the bad guys were working for the admin and therefore escaping would mean they were out the game without killing more than half of the innocents which to me meant a lose for them.
My text this morning was an unintended error, I wasn't really thinking about my text limit since someone was asking a sort of out of character person and so I absent mindedly answered it without really thinking about text limits etc.
Overall I really really enjoyed the game, having our forum names unkown really adds an interesting dimension to it, I was surprised when we found out peoples true identites at death though, I thought that would have stayed secret to the players so we didn't know who was removed and therefore who potentially was left.
Finally, the only real problem with this game that I had was quite players. It's slightly frustrating when you get people who just don't post.

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:39

zaphod79 wrote:

Mr Dave wrote:

zaphod79 wrote:

Can i ask why Mr Dave knows so much about this but did not 'seem' to be playing ?

Or are we just in the endgame here [Vote : Mr Dave]

You can. I never even signed up to play.

Okay :-)

"Mr Dave , how come you seem to know so much about whats going on here, are you just too awesome for words?"

And I did think you would be in there because of the chance to be unknown

Sadly, I am not too awesome for words. In this regard at least.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

Bloody non-posting players are going to mess up our nice neat endgame plan, although we have a plan to get around that.

sdg · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:55

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Bloody non-posting players are going to mess up our nice neat endgame plan, although we have a plan to get around that.

I don't really understand why people join if they aren't going to post, I mean there are plenty days where I am not able to get to a computer so I just post from my phone during a break, even if it is a random post which doesn't really add anything to the discussion.

It's just frustrating eh? ?:|

The Rev Owen · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:57

I'm glad I was right about "Vicky".

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Tue Nov 17, 2009 16:57

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Bloody non-posting players are going to mess up our nice neat endgame plan, although we have a plan to get around that.

Pork Benny. With a giant porking machine.

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

superdupergill wrote:

It's just frustrating eh? ?:|

Its the *most* frustrating part of the whole game , the issue is that on a normal game the non posting means that votes cannot be made (not enough of a majority) , and that baddies can 'hide' in that group of people who dont get involved , and the goodies then have to work out which ones really are quiet and which ones are quiet but hiding.

The anonimity of this game means that they could have gotten away with it even more (so in a normal game if someone like 123546576 is quiet you know somethings up , but in this game if Richard is quiet , maybe thats just because he is

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49233

Can I point out that bloody Al81nsor8hg63508 has led the vote for me in the last three bloody games, even when he didn't know who I was?

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

Grim... and I have ambitions to run a lightning game one day over IM or IRC.

Be Excellent To Each Other

"Wld u lk 2 ply a gme?" dead thread

Who is online