Boredfan1 wrote:Excuse me, people are saying things that are NOT true! The whole point is STILL to survive, that is the main thing of the damn role and yet these guys are saying that this rework goes away from that when it makes no sense to say that! If people would stop saying things that are blatently false, maybe it wouldn't appear that way.
1-The only way you could fail to get supplies is by being jailed or roleblocked.
2-The fact that the game is very often one sided means that if their existence can make it more balanced, it's good so long as it's fun to play as.
3- It doesn't really increase the likelihood of losing, the role is pretty much the same.
But what isn't true? You're not making an argument here of how the objections are false.
You're saying that there's no way to fail to get supplies... aside from you know.. choosing to vest to protect yourself over gather supplies. Which is a mechanic in your role. They can vest or gather supplies.
Let's make this clear:
If you can win just by gathering supplies even if you die- It is not a survivor.
If you lose because you are unable to gather supplies even if you live - It is not survivor
If neither of the above is true - There is no reason to add the supply gathering mechanic
That is the objection people are making. That is why they are saying it principally goes against the idea of the survivor.
2. To your second point.. this change does nothing to balance the game if it turns one sided. The basic strategy as survivor now is simply to do nothing until your vote is needed to give one side majority or the other. This change of needing to gather supplies only forces you to not side with one side or the other until you gather your supplies so you can win even if your vote would give them majority. Now imagine you're mafia. You have a survivor refusing to vote with you, thus preventing you from winning because you're stuck in a bg-doc combo with three mafia and a survivor. Who would you kill so you can vote the last townies and win? Precisely. Which leads us to the last point
3. By the very nature of the role change you're introducing a lose option to a role that has nothing to do with their ability to "Survive" which means that yes, very much you're increasing the likelihood of losing as the role because there's now two ways of losing, failing to gather supplies or dying.
If you really like this concept, allow me to make it better for you. With one change
During the night you may choose to gather supplies for your Bunker or wear a bullet proof vest
You have 1 bullet proof vest
When you gather supplies three time, you will enter your Bunker.
Inside your bunker, you have Invincible defense.
This means that once you have gathered your supplies you cannot be killed except by hanging and forces you to engage in day chat. It forces you to be selective about role claiming survivor because you can side with anyone and no side can kill you except by gaining the majority to vote you out. This makes survivor more of a strategic role to play. And forces you to play the role. You can't just claim day 1 and afk and hope no one kills you. You have to talk to chat and convince them you're on their side.
I mean that's obviously a bare bones idea that needs refining but it answers literally all of the current objections to your role idea.