Theory - 100 players - Impossible

Fiasco · Post Post #10 (isolation #0) » Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:34 am

I like big games, but before beginning to take the possibility of a 100 player game seriously, we should first get a 40-50 player game to run well. (There's no way I'd want to commit myself to play in a game for years, but maybe such a game needn't last quite that long. Example: 3 kills per night, 2 lynches per day, 1 week (on average!) per day means 20 weeks for a 100 player game.)

Fiasco · Post Post #12 (isolation #1) » Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:35 am

Yeah, I guess. But keep in mind that we're talking about average, not maximum, kill rates.

Anyone for Mafia vs Werewolves vs Aliens vs Demons vs Robots vs Orcs vs Pirates vs Apes vs Zombies vs Holograms vs Dinosaurs vs Terrorists vs Klingons vs Mutants vs Nazis vs Trolls vs Ninjas vs Vampires vs Dragons vs Barbarians?

(Yeah, I know, Klingons are aliens, but these are more like Greys or like Alien aliens.)

Fiasco · Post Post #15 (isolation #2) » Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:25 am

Blackberry wrote:O_O

I forgot Cherries. My bad.

Fiasco · Post Post #16 (isolation #3) » Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:14 am

I could see a 50 player game being a lot of fun if run as a high-profile invitational or semi-invitational with some universally-liked theme (or without theme). People would be selected for whether they could be trusted not to lurk; hopefully everyone would be more motivated because of the Big Event factor.

Fiasco · Post Post #21 (isolation #4) » Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:06 am

I like that idea, but it might make people afraid to stand out. For any big dispute there are going to be people who disagree strongly with both sides, and it seems like it'd be very easy to land in the top 5 just by taking a strong stand on anything.

Fiasco · Post Post #28 (isolation #5) » Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:29 pm

People are making serious plans for a 100 player game, yet most think 25-30 player games are "too big". I find this disturbing.