The Midgard Saga II [Concluded]

[Privateerkev]

The way this reads to me, King Harald Bluetooth might well have a secondary victory condition of killing Haakon Jarl, and vice versa. The Captain of Jomsborg might also have a similar motive. This is something to keep in mind when looking at who challenges who, and how they vote for lynching.

I found this in round 2 of Midgard 1's writeup:

The discussion this round went along the lines of clan affiliation or no affiliation.
I intentionally left the “townies” in the no affiliation category; only Kings, Champions and War Vets belonged to a faction. This was one of the twists I put in the game. The factions were just for narrating purposes and had no meaning in the game as such. As I hoped some would accuse the none-affiliated of being Jotun as they believed all humans belonged to a faction.

Now this might have changed this game but my hunch is that it is simply "town" versus "Jotun." The factions are probably for flavor and nothing more. I would caution us against fanning any "inter-faction" flames. Infighting among the town will help the Jotun. I've been reading through Midgard 1's thread (I'm on page 19) and the town's infighting really hurt them early in the game. It kept them from uniting. In that game, the Jotun eventually won.

[TinCow]

Now this might have changed this game but my hunch is that it is simply "town" versus "Jotun." The factions are probably for flavor and nothing more. I would caution us against fanning any "inter-faction" flames. Infighting among the town will help the Jotun. I've been reading through Midgard 1's thread (I'm on page 19) and the town's infighting really hurt them early in the game. It kept them from uniting. In that game, the Jotun eventually won.

This begs the question of why anyone would engage in Holmgang in the first place. If attacking a Jotun will likely result in death for the townie due to the Jotun being stronger, and it will not result in the Jotun being IDed (as noted earlier), then there is no legitimate reason for a townie to challenge anyone. Gods might well be different, since they are likely strong enough to defeat a Jotun in a Holmgang. There's also the question of whether there is an advantage for the Jotun themselves to challenge. Can they both challenge a Holmgang AND do night kills? If so, then they could possibly kill an extra person every night if they were lucky. If not, it might be a way of masking their kills as something more 'innocent.'

So, this leaves three plausible reasons for people to challenge for a Holmgang:
1) Townies who are bored or just roleplaying.
2) Gods who are essentially acting like vigilantes.
3) Jotun who are trying to get extra kills or disguise their hits.

This then turns into a Catch-22. We want to discourage #1, since it doesn't really help the town. However, if no one does #1, then anyone who does #2 will instantly become obvious to the Jotun. Since we do want to encourage #2 (when done accurately), that means that #1 is necessary to cover up #2. However, then #1 results in townie deaths, which we want to discourage...

I think it comes down to a balancing act. Will the town's losses due to #1 outweigh the possible advantage of killing a Jotun with #2? My personal opinion is no, simply because the odds of #2 actually resulting in a Jotun death are pretty slim. Without investigation results, such a hit is just random and likely to do more harm than good. With investigation results, a lynch could easily be obtained, making #2 unnecessary.

So, as I see it the only people who have a reason to be challenging are the Jotun, and everyone else who does it is just hurting the town.

[GeneralHankerchief]

IIRC, those who survived a Holmgang were incapacitated for a round last time.

[Privateerkev]

I haven't gone through the whole thread of Midgard 1 but it does seem that Sigurd lets some hints out in Holmgang writeups. So, there is a chance that fighting a Jotun will help even if the townie loses. Enough information might leak out to throw a spotlight on the Jotun and then get him lynched. Now, does the possible reward outweigh the risk? It doesn't seem so. Lynching is much more of a sure thing if we have the right target. Where Holmgang has the chance that you will lose, no matter how powerful you are.

And I think Jotun can fight in Holmgang and then kill the same night. I'll need to read more of the old thread to be sure though. There is a lot to go through... (54 pages!)

*edit*
Those who survived Holmgang couldn't fight in the next Holmgang. But I don't know if it prevented them from doing night actions. I'll keep reading...

[Privateerkev]

Sorry for the double-post but this is a different topic.

Motep, the other person who didn't vote in Day 1 might be Jotun as well.

He hasn't been on the board since the game started.

The Jotun had 1 kill last night. I bring your attention to this from Round 8 of Midgard 1:

I was a little surprised that no-one made a challenge. If the right player had been challenged and the right player had won that challenge the town might have had a chance to win. If Stig or Alexander had been challenged by Husar, he could have removed one of them from the game. In my rules there would only be one kill attempt a night and Idun would have protected two.

By that point, the Jotun were down to two. So, according to Sigurd, putting them to 1 allows them only 1 kill.

So both Motep and Traitorix could be Jotun if we work off the assumption that there are 3 Jotun.

It is probably at least 1 of them. Might be both.

It now seems clear that at least 1, and maybe even 2, Jotun are played by inactive players. And Motep and Traitorix are two of the most inactive players we have.

[Andres]

We can use the Holmgang to put two suspects against each other.

In think it's in the towns' best interest to decide by majority vote who should challenge who and than have only one challenge, to make sure that it will indeed be the two most suspicious people who have to fight.

This will make sure that it is at least a suspect who will die in the Holmgang.

And whoever refuses to cooperate (i.e. an elected suspect refuses to challenge the other), can be lynched

To avoid any misunderstandings or any misinterpretation by the host, I suggest we vote for the Holmgang as such:

Suspect 1 : X
Suspect 2 : Y

The suspects with the most votes have to challenge each other. No other challenges are allowed.

Can we all agree on that?

[Privateerkev]

We can use the Holmgang to put two suspects against each other.

In think it's in the towns' best interest to decide by majority vote who should challenge who and than have only one challenge, to make sure that it will indeed be the two most suspicious people who have to fight.

This will make sure that it is at least a suspect who will die in the Holmgang.

And whoever refuses to cooperate (i.e. an elected suspect refuses to challenge the other), can be lynched

To avoid any misunderstandings or any misinterpretation by the host, I suggest we vote for the Holmgang as such:

Suspect 1 : X
Suspect 2 : Y

The suspects with the most votes have to challenge each other. No other challenges are allowed.

Can we all agree on that?

Seems complicated. During the day, we vote to lynch. At night, we challenge. Your proposing adding a third mechanic into this. Where does it go? Do we vote for suspects during the day while we are also voting for the lynch candidate? Or do we do it at night? The problem with doing it during the day is that I can see people confusing the multiple kinds of voting they are asked to do. The problem with doing it at night is that a lot of people aren't active enough to get 2 seperate mechanics done in 24 hours. And keep in mind that unlike doing it during the day, doing it at night would require one mechanic to take place before the other. You would have to get everyone to vote on challenge suspects. Then you'd have to get those people to challenge each other. If everyone is not active, it seems like it would be easy for a few people to derail the whole thing.

I like the spirit of what you propose but I am stuck on how to best implement it.

[Andres]

Seems complicated. During the day, we vote to lynch. At night, we challenge. Your proposing adding a third mechanic into this. Where does it go? Do we vote for suspects during the day while we are also voting for the lynch candidate? Or do we do it at night? The problem with doing it during the day is that I can see people confusing the multiple kinds of voting they are asked to do. The problem with doing it at night is that a lot of people aren't active enough to get 2 seperate mechanics done in 24 hours. And keep in mind that unlike doing it during the day, doing it at night would require one mechanic to take place before the other. You would have to get everyone to vote on challenge suspects. Then you'd have to get those people to challenge each other. If everyone is not active, it seems like it would be easy for a few people to derail the whole thing.

I like the spirit of what you propose but I am stuck on how to best implement it.

Vote for lynch during the day, select suspects to fight each other during the night. How is that complicated?

Look at the Holmgang as a sort of lynching. Instead of lynching one suspect, you put two suspects against each other and at least one dies.

[Privateerkev]

Vote for lynch during the day, select suspects to fight each other during the night. How is that complicated?

Look at the Holmgang as a sort of lynching. Instead of lynching one suspect, you put two suspects against each other and at least one dies.

Because at night we also challenge. So, we'd have to vote at night. And then at some point before the deadline, we'd have to get the two suspects to challenge each other. What if they are not online? Some of us only have certain windows on when they can be online. We're lucky if we get people here once in a 24 hour period.

Unless you propose maybe 12 hours of voting for suspects, and then leave 12 for the challengers to challenge each other. But 12 hours might not be enough to get everyone's input.