Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

Wrap Up The Resistance (beta 1.712) - Debriefing

Jia

Jia

New member
First of all, thank you all for participating in this beta version of the game! I'm sorry that we had to leave it unresolved, we ended up in the unlikely situation where one of our players (and TAB members) went MIA.

Nevertheless, you guys have spent a lot of time with the game, and since we were rather close to finishing it, you've had the chance to get a good impression of how this version of the game works.
Normally the Spies are aware of each others' identities, while the Resistance members are left in the dark. This gives the Spies an obvious advantage, since they can use the forum's PM system to work together and plan out their every move. In a game that already favors the Spies, this is even more of an advantage. That's why I wanted to try out keeping the Spies' identities a secret as well, to see how it all plays out.

This is where I need your input, your feedback is important for me to figure out how to tweak the game.

If you have a few minutes to spare, do share your thoughts to help improve future games!

Ze Questionnaire (mostly for the first-time players):

  • What did you like about the game?
  • What did you dislike (aside from not being able to finish it) about the game?
  • Do you see any room for improvement, if yes, where?
  • Did you feel that the game was too easy for either the Resistance or the Spies?
  • Any ideas on how to improve moderation of the game?
  • Any additional thoughts?

If you were a returning player:

  • How would you compare this game to the last one(s)? Was there something that you thought went better in the last game(s)? Or did you see any improvement in this game?
  • How do you rate the "anonymous Spies" rule change? Do you prefer this "game mode" over the normal one (where the Spies know each others' identities?)
  • Did this game mode give either side a better shot at winning?
  • See any room for further improvement?
  • How did you like the group size? Are 10 players too many? Did you prefer the smaller groups? What group sizes would you recommend for future games?

Thank you! :)

PS: Use this thread for your rule suggestions or game tweaks, that way we'll have them all in one place and we can keep discussing them as we keep playing in the future!
 
  • How would you compare this game to the last one(s)? Was there something that you thought went better in the last game(s)? Or did you see any improvement in this game?
This game was both easier and harder, I had to stir the waters of the game and undermine the whole group, rather than directly affecting it. Because I like causing paranoia, even amongst people who I thought were on my team, this worked well. I mentioned to Psionic that that was a more fun motivation for me than winning the game. Wait, did I mention that? I wrote so many things into PMs and deleted them before sending....


  • How do you rate the "anonymous Spies" rule change? Do you prefer this "game mode" over the normal one (where the Spies know each others' identities?)
This game mode has even LESS chance for a resistance win I feel, as resistance cannot rely on spies voting together. Typically resistance players would notice that people are collaborating and make conclusions here.


  • Did this game mode give either side a better shot at winning?
From my perspective, spies. Resistance never seemed in control of the game, with so many new players in the background, being suspicious as a result.

  • See any room for further improvement?
Hidden spies needs to be a variant for advanced players only, with no new players being quiet it would've been much harder for spies.

  • How did you like the group size? Are 10 players too many? Did you prefer the smaller groups? What group sizes would you recommend for future games?
No problem with group size as far as how the game was run, but hidden see previous comment.
 
  • What did you like about the game?
The thought processes and deception that takes places throughout the game.

  • What did you dislike (aside from not being able to finish it) about the game?
Cant say much that i disliked about the game, there were a few time breaks in the game (but thats expected with a decent sized group that spans timezones).

  • Do you see any room for improvement, if yes, where?
The setup seemed perfect really, i cant think of any real way to improve it.

  • Did you feel that the game was too easy for either the Resistance or the Spies?
The game seemed easy for the spies, perhaps it was because of such a large group or the inexperience of the players involved that lead this to be the case.

  • Any ideas on how to improve moderation of the game?
The moderation was well done, messages and control was appropriate and i couldnt see anything wrong with it.

  • Any additional thoughts?
As a spy in this scenario it was very easy to sit back and play the game like a resistance member, then let all the others do the finger pointing while flying under the radar, I think that this causes the spies to have a huge advantage when there is a large amount of people in a group because you can duck all of the blame by holding a certain way of thought.




Edit: I suck at formating
 
I was kinda thrown out of the game pretty early due to me not being able to connect to the site.

Other than that i believe this game was fun and keeps you on your toes. Not letting the spies know each other is a good way to help balance out the teams and keep it a little bit fair.

For future games i think we can implement a hint system for the spies so they can locate each other and possibly give their selves away to the resistance.

EXAMPLE: My hint may be "as a spy" I usually tend to wear tight clothing and own BMW.

Pretty easy for the spies to figure this one out but it is also a double edge sword. You want to make it so your spy friends can figure out who you are but not make it so easy that the resistance can figure out who you are?

Thought?
 
I think if the spies knew who each other were in a very large game like this then it would be overwhelmingly in their favor. That being said I had a lot of fun playing and the beginning of the game was super interesting. I think that they would have definitely won had they known who each other spy was though. It sucks that the game ended prematurely. As far as improvements go, I'm not sure what really could be changed. The spy cell idea is a good one however.
 
  • How would you compare this game to the last one(s)? Was there something that you thought went better in the last game(s)? Or did you see any improvement in this game?
I felt that it was pretty much in line with the last two I played, as far as being fun and intriguing.
  • How do you rate the "anonymous Spies" rule change? Do you prefer this "game mode" over the normal one (where the Spies know each others' identities?)
It still favors spies and doesn't add any balance in that regard. I think it is a bit easier to spot spies when you KNOW they know who each other are. People tend to drop little clues without meaning it when they are collaborating. It's much easier to spot a cell of 4 spies than 4 spies all working independently.
  • Did this game mode give either side a better shot at winning?
Still favored spies, perhaps slightly more so.
  • See any room for further improvement?
I think we were onto a good thing with the Intel Specialist to give more balance. More has been said on that in the other thread.
This game is driven by player participation, which was lacking last game to the point of cancelling it altogether. I don't know if it was inexperience or a lack of understanding of what the time and participation commitment was, or both. Maybe if we make it clearer that players need to be VERY active- 1-2 posts in the thread, plus PMs, and voting within a 24 hour period. This is just to give a general idea, I'm not advocating kicking people for being inactive for a day or two, but I think there needs to be understanding and commitment going in.
  • How did you like the group size? Are 10 players too many? Did you prefer the smaller groups? What group sizes would you recommend for future games?
I felt 10 was too many, but maybe that was due more to inactivity than an actual problem with size. I think 7 participants is a good sweet spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom