Intruders: Experiment Results

[Judge Sam]

You may not know this, but the only "competitive" reality show I watch anymore is Big Brother haha. And no not the crappy US one, the UK and Australia ones. On Big Brother people who enter the House not during the first day are called Intruders. Every international season has them at least once, some do it two or three times during the season.


I the idea of Intruders. New people = more fun. It shakes things up, changes the game around, gives everyone energetic new people to talk to, etc. Really who wants to talk to the same people for the whole game?


So anyway my goal was to make Intruders work with Mafia. I'm not sure if it's been done before in a way like this.


There were tons of problems to overcome to make this idea work. I could type up 1,000s of words of reasoning. The biggest problem to overcome was to somehow not divide the entire game into two "groups" where people divided it and tried to divide up the # of Spies in each group. I also did not want one group to be decimated as that kinda defeats the point. I quickly realized that the Intruders couldn't be a small number, or they risked just being all voted out one by one by a dumb original group. That was probably my biggest fear.


For awhile I thought about doing a few small groups of Intruders, or a staggered entry, but those ideas didn't pan out. (Maybe for another season down the road? :-))


So I decided on one big group entering. For awhile I had them enter after Episode 3, but that turned out to have a lot of problems on how the original Spies could survive. It wouldn't be much of a surprise or impact after just one episode so doing it after two episodes worked perfectly.


I tried out a whole bunch of numbers, from 10 Original and 6 Intruders to 18 Original and 10 Intruders. There were like 15 combinations, and that was before I included odd numbers of groups. That doubled the possibilities!


Anyway after the applications came in and I looked into it a bit more I began to narrow it down. Some scenarios had equal groups at the merge (like this one did) others had 2 more people in the original group and others had 4 more people in the original group. I didn't plan on making the two groups equal for awhile, but in the end that's how I decided to do it. So that's weeks of my thought process there in a few paragraphs haha.


So here's the question: Did Intruders work in Spies 3?

My answer: No, it didn't.


But could Intruders work in general in Mafia?

My answer: I don't know as I haven't tested it, but yes, I think it could.


I don't believe Intruders worked in this specific game of Spies. I could write another 1,000 words on why that is (and maybe I will) but I think it has to do with the type of people in each group more than anything. Or maybe not, maybe it is destined to happen even if I ran this game setup 100 different times.


There were 11 of both groups at the merge. At the final 10 it was 7 Intruders and 3 Originals. At every Exile, when votes were counted, an Original was Exiled. Even the one Trina used Do or Die an Original would have gone. That makes me sad, and I'm still not exactly sure why that happened, but the results clearly show that Intruders did not work because the groups did not mesh.


If I had to do this setup again I would probably adjust the numbers a bit. Maybe do 16 Originals and 10 Intruders so the Original group has a lead-in of 2 people when the merge comes. Or maybe a lead-in of 3 or 4 people? I was overly worried that the Intruders would be targeted and eliminated one by one (as happens in nearly every other survivor / big brother game), but now I think I'd be more worried about the Originals. It really sucks that one group of people got targeted and the other didn't, but I don't know how much of fault that was of the game or you guys. =) The funny thing is that for most of the game, from my perspective (not yours :-)), you had a much higher chance of catching Spies from the new group than the old because they had 3.


But besides that respect I loved the energy, personality, and enthusiasm 11 new people brought to the game. I can't even imagine what it would be like without them!

[Jessica]

I can't really give a good answer since I wasn't really looking for spies, but it seems to me that people wanted to keep voting original players since there was more evidence against them and more voting history to base votes on.

It seems like it would be pretty hard for it to work since this would probably happen the same if tried again. The only thing I could think might work is if the intruders were playing another game and had to do exiles and everything, then there would be more of a power struggle and people would have to work together more than just the new players agreeing with the originals.

[Raphael]

OMG, I am totally in love with BBAU right now. It is the only internation version of BB that I have ever watched, and this is the first season of it that I have watched, but I didn't know anyone else watched it! But I do like it better than the US version. I hope that they start to incorperate things like the intruders or the house nominating (instead of HOH) for the new season because apparently big changes are in store.

[Tenchi]

I like Jessica's idea.

Imagine if we have two groups of people playing the exact game (like Asteria/CC), the reasons why people got to vote people off the newer groups its because they had a previous history, same amount of evidence and leads to follow.

Also, you can put it on the type of players. I am thinking if it was the other way around, what if Judith, Anneliese or Jack was in the Intruder group, could it have changed the game significantly?

[Reicheru]

Ok... since I have to have an opinion on everything... here's mine on, literally, everything.

The "collective" twist:

It didn't work. Not at all.

My original idea, as far as I said it to you after (I think) Spies 2 (can't remember now, it's too long ago) was to have two separate spies games, neither knowing about the other. Say fourteen players including two spies apiece. And when it got down to ten, the games would be "merged", together with however many spies there were left, for a total of (if all spies had survived the first two rounds) twenty players and four spies. Each group has its own preconceptions, etc.

Obviously I don't know how much of your twist, if any, was an extension of the idea that I gave you, but the "collective" threw me for a loop that I never really recovered from. I think it hit many other citizens that way as well. Honestly, I don't think the twist was necessary. I don't see what good it did, apart from getting a huge reaction. And frankly there was enough in the game to do that without needing a huge twist like this!

Of every eliminated player other than "ambushed" ones, ELEVEN were from the original group. (Twelve if you include Imagine.) Every single exiled player was an original, unless you count Trina (and don't forget that the two players VOTED at that point were Anneliese and Jack - two originals - so I don't.) Jordan and Audrey were the only two newcomers imprisoned. Sujata was removed from the game. If you dismiss inactives and fake players, that's ten to two in favour of the originals. It speaks for itself.

Finally, because of the "twist", we effectively had a 22 player game with five spies in it. In Spies 2, we effectively had a 21 player game with two spies in it (I think Leo checked out of the game while Allison was still settling in), and one of the spies still came without hours of winning the whole thing. Considering how well two spies did, five was obviously overkill.


As to the "roles":

Counteragent - way too powerful. I think an investigation should probably be earnt, in a challenge or like the "Gambler".

Do or die - good role, provided the person who has it can be trusted to 1) keep it secret, and 2) use it on a spy. I like it because it's the kind of role that can't be used until late on in the game if at all, and then very very carefully.

Gift Giver - quite possibly the best role ever, apart from...

Wheel of Fortune - and you know that was coming.

Ballot Stuffer - nice idea, didn't work out. Can't win 'em all.

Gambler - very well-judged role. Again, it works well, as long as the citizen who has it doesn't immediately "swap" roles with a spy! (See "Wheel of Fortune".)

Builder - As Inspired by the Wheel of Fortune! Should've worked great, but didn't. I think the only mistake you made - and I can't see how this could've been predicted - was telling Anneliese how many posts there were, rather than just whether or not the bunker is still intact. That's too much information to give one citizen. It completely muddied things up. Nobody was sure what was a fact, and yet nobody could afford to ignore it either.

Inheritor - Now this one I'm gonna rip into you for, Sam, because it's TOTALLY unfair on the spies. Think how much Tenchi, Jessica, Allison, Bebe and myself especially risked in order to get information about roles in our respective games. Now, imagine that, once we'd eliminated Tiffany (the "Gambler"), someone else (probably Antonio or Rodney, who were most like Miles in this game) had "inherited" it instead. Same with Jenna's card-reader thing. I would have been RAVING if that had happened. In fact, the main reason I voted Miles (awbeit unwillingly) was because I simply couldn't believe that you'd put in a role that would PUNISH the spies for being skilled enough to take out a role-player! It had to be a spy role.

Psychic - HORRIBLE. HORRIBLE. HORRIBLE. Until the psychic it was all very clinical, nice battle of brains like Spies 1. Then along came Adriana... This spoilt the game, gave one citizen far too much power, and at the same time made that citizen a huge target for imprisonment.

Decision Maker - The nice side of the psychic! Along with the gambler, this is probably the best judged role.


The other twists:

Recruitment - Obviously the lottery worked better than you could have hoped. And I loved the chance to pick and choose one spy partner. It also gave the citizens some more information they could base their decisions on (even though they never seemed to use it beyond the bizarre and wronger-than-I-could-describe Davoni theory, the information was there...)

Surprise early imprisonment - beyond giving the spies an extra way to give themselves away, as I very neatly did, this does nothing for the game. It adds nothing, not even some false tension. I hated the idea and I hated the way that it was executed. I know I'm biased, but I still think this was incredibly ill-conceived and stupid as hell.

Private Eye - this one, on the other hand, was really well done. At first I was dead against it, but in the end it worked out well for me.
Double-exile rounds - they kinda worked in a five-spy game, but only because there were (IMO) one too many spies anyway. I think the second double-exile round was too much of a disadvantage to the spies.

Exiled inactives - nasty. I think an inactive who doesn't vote should be removed from the game immediately before exile. The citizens lose a player, true, but they still get to exile who they want. The offset in the citizen's favour is that they also lose an extra suspect. I can't see any disadvantage, to either side, to taking out an inactive before exile instead of making the citizens (and the spies, don't forget that in every "inactive" exile in ANY Spies game the person who was saved was a cit!) lose the chance to vote someone off.

Imprisoned inactives - about ten times more unfair than a wasted exile. I've said it before, a wasted exile for the citizens is one less chance to catch a spy. A wasted imprisonment could be death for ALL of the spies, especially in a game with an "investigator" or two.

That said, I can't criticize you for Jordan. His timing was so awful that I don't see that you had a choice. Not taking him out would have been handing the win to the spies.

Immunity challenges - Nice way to throw a wrench in the works.


It says a lot that the game I think most players would agree was the best of the three was Spies 1 - the one WITHOUT any twists in it. As a spy OR a citizen, I don't want to be worrying about silly "twists" that don't add anything to the game anyway. I want to be figuring out the spies or trying to fool the citizens.

And once again - I've said this at least a hundred times, but I'm going to say it again - if you think you NEED twists, you don't have a good game. Spies 1 easily stood up on its own without them- in fact I'd put that as probably the best ORG I've ever played, and I've played LOTS. Spies 3 also stood up as a game good enough to survive without twists, and IMO it would have been even better without some of the ones it did have. Spies 2 was spoilt by inactives, but the surprise imprisonment still ranks as my absolute least favourite "twist" in any Spies game, ever. It was horrible.

Comments, anyone?

[Jack]

It was a very very fun twist, though it did complicate things.

[Shane]

I haven't read everything in here yes, so maybe I'm repeating something, but in my opinion, it didn't work for one major reason.

The way this game is set up, you have to learn who to trust, and fast. Since we were split up, and for the "original" people, with no knowledge of the others, it made it very hard to meet all the new people, while having to deal with preconceived notions for ten other players, all while voting and looking for five Spies. It was just so much to grasp at first. That's usually why the first couple Exiles are so scattered, everyone is trying to find a footing, and just when we thought we had a foothold, we got hit with eleven more players. I'd assume it would be the same for the "Intruders". Also, now that we have eleven more people to met and get a vibe off of, while voting for people we think are Spies, we were hit even a larger number of Spies, who, unlike us, didn't really have the problem of meeting everyone while voting, because they KNEW who to trust. They have five people, our of the twenty one left (following the Imprisonment).

If you look at the voting, the old people all had suspicions on the people they played with so far, and we stuck with them. The new people have none of these suspicions, and wanting to fit in and play the game, tried to learn everything they could as fast as they could, which resulted in bandwagoning. It wasn't until a few more Exiles after the merge that people found a foothold aging, but by then we all got hit with the Bunker drama, but that's for another day.

The idea of a "Secret" tribe is cool. I loved it in Carlsbad Caverns, and in Asteria which was basically the same thing. It works very well in Survivor, as tribes are intended to be separate. but when it comes to Mafia, and games like this, it's different. This game is intended to be played as a team, and when you get hit with eleven new teammates a fourth of the way into the game, it's harder to mesh. People try to force it, and everyone happens so fast, you just end up with a huge clusterfuck of people pulling every which way, and it results in a bigger mess, which just plays into the hands of the Spies (which they just ate right up).

Good idea, just bad execution, in my opinion, and I don't think it falls on you Sam. It's just the game. It's hard.

[Judith]

A big flaw for me was that I just kind of gave up and went inactive, which kind of led to my fall. I lost social-activity with some people. Too many people at once, I didn't want to write in my confessional about them, I didn't want to have to start the boring-part of the game all over again. It just threw every theory I had been working on really hard on the window after, what, 10 days?

[Shane]

Exiled inactives - nasty. I think an inactive who doesn't vote should be removed from the game immediately before exile. The citizens lose a player, true, but they still get to exile who they want. The offset in the citizen's favour is that they also lose an extra suspect. I can't see any disadvantage, to either side, to taking out an inactive before exile instead of making the citizens (and the spies, don't forget that in every "inactive" exile in ANY Spies game the person who was saved was a cit!) lose the chance to vote someone off.

Imprisoned inactives - about ten times more unfair than a wasted exile. I've said it before, a wasted exile for the citizens is one less chance to catch a spy. A wasted imprisonment could be death for ALL of the spies, especially in a game with an "investigator" or two.

I agree with this. Give a player two strikes, if they fail to vote, they get the penalties like usual. Five votes should be enough to Exile them anyway, unless it's very early or if everyone is just so clueless that votes go every which way. The second time they fail to vote, just take them out before the vote, and let the Exile go as planned.

Which leads into the forced Imprisonment, yeah, Jordan had to be done. This I think needs to be a judgement call on you, and I hate to say that, because it completely contradicts everything I said about Exiles. I feel that the only time you should force an Imprisonment of an inactive players, is in the event they pull a Jordan. Idling at the end, when keeping them in the game will effectively end it in favor of one side. The last thing a host wants to do is effect the end game, or have an idler ruin a magnificent game.

Also, on this note. I feel you need to always have some sort of Tiebreaker role in every Spies game. If you do end up kicking someone out, and the numbers end up with a tie at Exile that isn't broken, you need a way to break that tie without resorting to some lame challenge. This isn't Survivor.

[Shane]

Also, Rei, you forgot the whole "note from the Losers" twist. Although it seemed to just fizzle out and blow over, I thought that was a neat idea, and one that could have worked very well, if people had actually looked at it more.

[Judge Sam]

These are great thoughts, thank you.

Also, on this note. I feel you need to always have some sort of Tiebreaker role in every Spies game. If you do end up kicking someone out, and the numbers end up with a tie at Exile that isn't broken, you need a way to break that tie without resorting to some lame challenge. This isn't Survivor.

I agree. Tiebreaker will be in future games. In Spies 1 and 2, I was paranoid having an Exile with an even number of votes because of ties, so I always tried to keep the numbers right. Plus ties are boring. Odd number of votes are always preferable at Exiles, especially at the end of the game. I think there were some misconceptions about this with the Spies. There will never be a final exile round with an even number of votes lol. That's just dumb. There will also never be a Final Four Exile, or even a Final Six Exile. I like odd votes. It's infinitely more exciting and I hate ties. Tiebreaker is there so I don't have to obsessively adhere to a number scheme in the early/middle part of the game just to avoid ties, which will be very useful.


I think there was also a misconception with the Spies regarding the name "Decision Maker." From their reading of the role description I got the feeling that they thought any undecided question would go straight to the Decision Maker to answer. So any time there was an uncertainty they felt it was their "right" to have Raphael answer it when this was not what the role did. The role was to be the tiebreaker + one special event (just cause tiebreaker by itself is boring) + *possibly* one question that I am personally undecided on and am exactly 50/50 on what I think should happen. That last bit was added on as an afterthought just in case, but it seemed to take center stage for some people unfortunately.

[Judge Sam]

raphael said:

OMG, I am totally in love with BBAU right now. It is the only internation version of BB that I have ever watched, and this is the first season of it that I have watched, but I didn't know anyone else watched it! But I do like it better than the US version. I hope that they start to incorperate things like the intruders or the house nominating (instead of HOH) for the new season because apparently big changes are in store.

I'm gonna IM you next time I see you online to talk about it. I don't have anyone else to talk Australia with!


The first season I saw was last year's Australia. This year's is definitely better than last years which is good. The problem is the people who vote in this show are all pre-teen girls lol (they actually did market research). They vote every girl, every time. But other than that it's still good.

[Judge Sam]

To people who suggested the 2 games merging into one idea, I did think about that for awhile and I think it could work under the right circumstances. I didn't have a very good impression of that idea at the time but with what some of you guys have said I can see how it would work. There's tons of problems with it I noticed; however maybe those problems can be worked through and then it would achieve a better end-game, I'm not sure.


Reaaaaaaally quickly here are the main problems:


- If I did that in this game, the game would have lasted five episodes. That's way way way too short lol. Short games are bad due to the massive, massive amount of preparation each game takes me to construct. I would consider 36 days to be on the lower-middle side of things.

- I have to do two Imprisonments. Though I guess I could copy/paste the text and just change names. So maybe that's not too bad.

- Two Exiles at a time, also not too bad I suppose if you enjoy overworking me.

- Dividing the # of Spies randomly in this setup causes exponentially more problems with going to Exile with no Spy to catch, possibly too much to do it. Cementing the # of Spies in each group I believe would lead to what it did in this game anyway, mass extinction of one group. If not that, then it would end up causing people to decide on who to vote for based solely on what group they are in, which I think is laaaaaame. *Especially* near the end of the game if we get down to the Final Nine and "there has to be one Spy in this group of 3 people from group A!"

- Even after doing this, let's say the "public" group has more outspoken people, wouldn't they just take control of things and vote their own group like they have been doing? Especially since one group is "secret" and one is "public."


Possibly it could work, but I liked this idea better. Someone mentioned how they didn't like twists... I mean the twists in Spies 2 and Spies 3 are basically as tiny as you can get lol. I'm not one for overwhelming amounts of twists. The only major twist this game had besides the fun smaller stuff in between was the intruders. If you think about it, I started with 26 I just kept 11 hidden for 9 days, which isn't too impact-ing. I didn't tell anyone the # of Spies to begin with anyway. I think it'd be easier to get to know 26 people in two chunks than all at once lol.

[Judge Sam]

I love your observations, and agree with quite a number of them! Especially counteragent. As you can see with how I handled investigations in Spies 2 and Spies 3, there are new and exciting and less overpowered ways to work in investigations into the game which I enjoy. Personally I'd rather not tell anyone anything haha but I can see how they add to the game. Like match/mismatch was fun. So was fake investigation.

reicheru said:

Ok... since I have to have an opinion on everything... here's mine on, literally, everything.

Just for the record, while I may have been subconsciously affected by your suggestions for the game, it's not where I got it from unfortunately. I got the intruders idea from Big Brother the TV show, as well as a Big Brother game I was in at the time in which I was a intruder after 37/100 days and loved it. . Bebe/Claire being Spies was just coincidence ended up happening for a variety of occurrences, not per your specific recommendations (which however were excellent ones. )

Finally, because of the twist, we effectively had a 22 player game with five spies in it.

Hmm... I don't see why you couldn't catch 1 or 2 spies at the first two Exiles. Actually I had thought it was going to happen. It was actually more probable to have 3 or 4 spies in the original 15 than 2, which would have increased it even more. I understand the inactive exile being a predictable problem though.

Builder - As Inspired by the Wheel of Fortune! Should've worked great, but didn't. I think the only mistake you made - and I can't see how this could've been predicted - was telling Anneliese how many posts there were, rather than just whether or not the bunker is still intact. That's too much information to give one citizen. It completely muddied things up. Nobody was sure what was a fact, and yet nobody could afford to ignore it either.

There was a lot of confusion about this role, as is understandable. Had I announced it Anneliese wouldn't be able to retract her statement. She would have been "confirmed" so unfortunately there had to be some ambiguity there. Reports as to the # of posts would only happen every three episodes. Doing it every episode would be too powerful I believe.


For example, Jessica had a plan in Episode 4 in which she would get Jennipher to post the word right before she was Exiled so Jessica could claim it for herself. This was a good plan, but it wasn't going to work because 1) Jessica had already destroyed the bunker a few days ago and 2) The next point report wouldn't be until after Episode 6.

Inheritor - Now this one I'm gonna rip into you for, Sam, because it's TOTALLY unfair on the spies. Think how much Tenchi, Jessica, Allison, Bebe and myself especially risked in order to get information about roles in our respective games. Now, imagine that, once we'd eliminated Tiffany (the "Gambler"), someone else (probably Antonio or Rodney, who were most like Miles in this game) had "inherited" it instead. Same with Jenna's card-reader thing. I would have been RAVING if that had happened. In fact, the main reason I voted Miles (awbeit unwillingly) was because I simply couldn't believe that you'd put in a role that would PUNISH the spies for being skilled enough to take out a role-player! It had to be a spy role.

I might not do it again soon but I don't really see a problem with it. It worked marvelously with the 3 roles in the game and fit a open hole in the game mechanics well. I don't know if you were there when I explained it at the finale, but originally there was a 4th role that was different than the Inheritor. A few weeks before the game began, after thinking about it for awhile, I judged it to be too powerful in connection with other roles. So I dropped it in and put in Inheritor.


The main objective for Inheritor was to keep an interesting role alive if it was "randomly" taken out very early in the game. You can see how it would suck, for both me and the Citizens, if I put tons of thought into an exciting role and then that person gets Imprisoned randomly in Episode 2. (or god forbid this person goes inactive, I'm not prescient on how people perform you know If that didn't happen, perhaps the Inheritor would be taken out before they got a role or they wouldn't have enough time to make full use of their role once they got it.


It went well with Gift Giver in that the gifts would continue to be given out. It worked perfectly with Do or Die which had a good chance of going unused - then it would transfer to a new person who might use it. It also worked with Builder because the Bunker might not have been built before this person was Exiled (estimated time of completion was 6 Episodes, a very long time for one person to stay), and now someone else can take up the task. So I was very happy with it, and don't really see any of the problems you described.

Surprise early imprisonment - beyond giving the spies an extra way to give themselves away, as I very neatly did, this does nothing for the game. It adds nothing, not even some false tension. I hated the idea and I hated the way that it was executed. I know I'm biased, but I still think this was incredibly ill-conceived and stupid as hell.

lol, all I did was post Imprisonment one day before it was expected as a mini-shock. I told this to the Spies clearly way before it happened. I'm talking episodes before. Then on the exact occurrence I told you all about what was happening and when (I had to, seeing as you had to make the decision one day early lmao). You misunderstood what was happening because you read what I posted wrong ala "the Spies MUST have a role!" I fail to see how your misunderstanding faults the idea. Anyway with non-live Imprisonments you don't have to worry about this anymore. (maybe)


I may be wrong, but if a Citizen logs onto the board one day before they expect Imprisonment, and see the red countdown timer and the news flasher saying Imprisonment has just happened, it'd give them a jolt of excitement and perhaps keep them more on their toes. It would have worked even cooler in Spies 3 with the pretty night color scheme.

Private Eye - this one, on the other hand, was really well done. At first I was dead against it, but in the end it worked out well for me.

Yeah. Spies are always against any sort of fun special event though. It's kind of a downer. Any time I schedule anything fun Spies start whining about how it's "game over" because I did it lmao. There's been 3 games, so future players can expect more fun events such as these. =) Besides, most of the time they are equally advantageous to Spies and Citizens, just like the Private Investigator was, just like the Costume Party was, and the Last Message of Hope was, etc. It all evens out.


I actually already have a long post typed up asking for advice on what to do with inactives lol. Gotta spread out the content to keep peeps interested! <3

[Shane]

I still laugh about Tyson being upset about that early Imprisonment. You had posted like a week prior that in the event me or him went at Exile, the next Imprisonment would occur the next day, instead of being two days off. You even mentioned it a couple times after you posted it. Then, when I go, you announce the Imprisonment for being on like a Sunday, but he starts telling half the people it's going to happen on Saturday. And he got all mad at you for doing it the day early. What's even funnier is that no one caught on, and just thought he made a scheduling mistake, all while he was freaking out thinking he completely messed up and was going to be Exiled. Good game Sam.

[Bebe]

I have thoughts on roles I'll post later, but one question first - What do you mean by "Private Eye"?

[Shane]

Julian's Report... the one that was completely edited out. Hehe.

[Tenchi]

I think the Edited Out report could have been better if the Citizens had a means of having the message delivered in full/with more text. Of course sabotage and inactives and mishaps (bad internet connections/etc.) would create more tension and suspicion, which is fun for Sam.

Anyway, I wll post more on the twists later. I just cannot do the long postings like the way David does them. >< Still, great job Rei-chan.

[Reicheru]

shane said:

I still laugh about Tyson being upset about that early Imprisonment. You had posted like a week prior that in the event me or him went at Exile, the next Imprisonment would occur the next day, instead of being two days off.

Erm... no he didn't, he said the imprisonment would occur "for example" the day after exile. And when that didn't happen I e-mailed Sam TWICE saying, "What's happening? Is the surprise imprisonment cancelled?" and got no reply. FOR THREE DAYS. The reason I slipped up was because I HAD NO IDEA WHEN THE FUCKING IMPRISONMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE.

Mark / Shane / Allison / whoever, how the fuck did that add anything to the game except giving me a new way to trip up that I wouldn't have had if Sam had bothered to host instead of sitting on his ass and letting me completely give myself away for a stupid, unnecessary, idiotic, pointless, doesn't add drama, only-possible-effect-is-to-screw-over-the-last-spy twist? How exactly does it help the game? How does it create tension? How does it do ANYTHING except screw over a spy?

Sam, I'm not railing at you here, I've done that enough; I'm railing at Mark for bringing up a stupid argument against a point that I thought I'd made long ago. Sorry for starting it up again.

[Judge Sam]

lol e-mail. that's the best way to get in touch with me, especially when I visit the spies board 3-4 times a day and read every post and my e-mail um.... never except during applications. I didn't respond to an e-mail concerning a trivial issue I didn't know was coming for THREE DAYS?!?! Why the fuck does anybody play Sam's games, what a shithead!

if Sam had bothered to host instead of sitting on his ass

That earns you a nice bold FUCK YOU from me.

[Reicheru]

Again with:

Sam, I'm not railing at you here, I've done that enough; I'm railing at Mark for bringing up a stupid argument against a point that I thought I'd made long ago. Sorry for starting it up again.

I wrote that a year ago, as you know. Why on earth you should be any more angry with me for bringing it up now I don't know.

But since you insist...

It was one of the stupidest "twists" I've ever come across in an ORG. It served NO POINT OTHER THAN TO GIVE ME A PRIME OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE MYSELF AWAY. Which I did. And I'm an idiot for it. Nothing's wrong with your hosting there, everything's my fault for taking the bait. Happy?

[Shane]

It's Matt by the way.

And yes, it was your fault, thanks for finally admitting that something you did in this series was less than 'perfect'. You toot your own horn more than anyone in this series, and all you have to show for it is a big whooping 0-3 record. Bravo.

Want to rail someone? Try someone else. I won't bend over and take it.

[Reicheru]

Oh for fuck's sake... if you're so shocked at my reaction, why did you even bring this up? Seriously? I was quoting, as near enough as I can remember, something I said in anger a year ago. I specifically said I didn't want to confront SAM about this, just you. If you aren't prepared for that, don't bring it up, ok? It's DONE WITH. Argument over. The end. I think it was a bad decision. You disagree. Get over it already.

[Shane]

[Jakub]

I realize this thread has wandered a bit off-topic, but I've never been one to not have an opinion on an issue. But could Intruders work in general in Mafia? A great big emphatic NO! I personal hate Intruder twists in all game. Yes, it keeps things fresh and interesting. But that's from the viewer perspective. For the player's it's unfair. The Original group had to work to get to Episode 3. The Intruders got a free pass. Myself, Leena, and almost Carrie were eliminated before half the cast had the opportunity to. I mean, I really wish I would have ended up in the Intruder group. Then maybe I would have actually gotten a chance to play. But personal bias aside, I really feel it creates an unfair playing field. If a player gets a bye to the next round because they won some sort of immunity or were last picked in a schoolyard pick'em event, then fine. But only because theoretically everyone in the game could have gotten that bye. The second you implement an advantage or disadvantage that one or more players cannot receive, I'm inclined to call foul.

[Arthur]

Reicheru is still the best player in Spies 3.

[Bebe]

Jakub had more of a chance to play than Audrey did. But the Spies were still allowed to imprison her. Also, Secret Mission peeps were vulnerable in exile 3, and had one been exiled then, they would've had as much game time as Jakub.

I really wasn't a fan of the Intruders twist because I don't see the point. I know Sam's explained why he loved it, but it seems to me in the end it all boils down to dramatic effect. I'm a mafia purist at heart and if there's no strategic impact, I'm not really interested.

I tried to use the Intruders thing to my advantage by squeezing information out of the Leaderboard people to relay to the Spies. So that was a strategic benefit from me. But from a citizen's point of view, the only advantage to newcomers is having more potential voters to use for your plans.

Sam said in his first post that new people shake things up, but I only see the negative side of it. You have 11 players who are informed and 11 players who are not. Information's the most important thing in this game, and having 11 players who are starting from square 1 is a burden and a hinderance, not a "fun twist".