Qikz wrote:That's the thing, it's much more strategical. All the mayoral protection adds is it adds one night of invincibility and a) that's not really fair on the bad guys who are already out numbered and b) it means you have one less special role in play who could actually make a difference depending on whether they were good or bad at the role.
You are advocating removing a strategic element of the game and simplifying one of the central roles and you're arguing it makes it more
strategical, but how?
You're not actually offering an explanation as to how
the game would be better without mayoral protection. As Shadow pointed out it's a shared power which can be used by both sides. Plenty of mayors were wolves during this game, DML even got in office towards the end of the game. Your point a) is redundant as it only gives them one less villager to target but there's plenty of other villagers to go for, and it gives them the option to manipulate the village into thinking a wolf has become mayor in order to gain the protection, therefore it makes the game more
strategic. Your point b) doesn't make sense, could you please explain?
Ok, so right now whoever gets mayor gets protection against wolf kills. The mayor is only protected from wolf kills and no other night role kills, correct? The mayor for example can still be shot by a vigilante or killed by a psycopath (atleast that's how the rules of mayoral protection usually work). So, the protection of the mayor role is only technically available to the villager side as the wolf side can't be attacked by themselves.
What it means is that whoever, on the village side gets mayor is completely invunrable and unkillable by the enemy team. All someone needs to do to get that power is to just get voted in, which when you have information about someone or you have a power role like Pacman did isn't exactly difficult to do. All this means is Pacman is removed entirely from the wolves/bad guys kill lists for that night and they just kill them instantly the next day (or atleast in this game as there was no witch doctor to have a protection circle going). Now that's fair enough, but is it really strategical in any real sense of the word? Not really. It's just a get out of jail free card for one night and they'll either do something useful or not before they die.
How this changes by having a witchdoctor in play and no mayoral protection is it makes things a lot more interesting. Suddenly Pacman isn't completely removed from the wolves kill pool. The wolves have to take a very difficult decision on whether or not they're going to attack Pacman the night he's mayor, because there's a chance that the witch doctor will save him. So do they attack him? They could think that the Witch Doctor protecting Pacman is an inevitability and not actually attack him, but that inevitability is unknown to anyone but the Witch Doctor and who he's in contact with.
There could be a gamble that the wolves, thinking that Pacman will be protected will go for someone else and the Witch Doctor may not even need to protect him at all. There's also another situation where the wolves may think that Pacman won't be protected for the previous reasons stated, attack him then waste a kill. It makes the wolves think more about who they're going to kill and when. It removes the element from the game of the wolves being entirely helpless for one night to kill an important player as they have no option to even try to do so. No wolf is going to attack a protected mayor and it means it's very, very, very unlikely for the wolves to ever miss a kill unless they attack a bodyguard. That to me isn't strategic, having choices and the ability to turn the tide of the game with a well placed protection is.