Herdanos wrote:The different voting structure definitely benefits the hitmen at the expense of the village, I think.
The same number of players are killed but fewer meaningful voting patterns are available for scrutiny afterwards.
Plus, because the goal is to lynch multiple people and each voter gets multiple votes, it makes our bloc vote extremely powerful. With Faba inactive we kind of knew we'd won by then, though we waited until as late as possible to bloc vote in case any villager had an All In card to play.
In the first vote, we chose not to bloc vote, but only because things were already going our way, and we were tracking the votes as they came in.
The rule preventing the three votes from being changed (once posted) also hindered the village, as it meant once someone had made a decision, we were relatively safe - even if our subsequent votes / responses seemed suspicious, those that had already voted couldn't change their minds.
Yeah, from being in the chat with you hitmen, I could see how a unified voice, the informed minority, were able to utilise that voting strategy. You were indeed right that All-In had been used on Day 6, so four votes from four people nullified the power of All-In. Had you just been three, things might have been different if you were unable to convince the others of the thread to vote with you. Though not by much. In terms of not being able to change votes once locked in, that definitely seemed to detract from discussion and tactical play.
I do think that with this game and the first AYA Hitman, I've injected a strong focus of analysis into things. Restricting powers, restricting kills to a smaller pool of players... But that focus can also be a weakness of the game, as it makes it so that analysis is the only means for the village to really win. Perhaps running a more classic GR game will help me get out of that analytical focus.