yes, but honestly looking at 25/26 you can’t tell me that there isn’t too much confirmability/BD power
like prince outted on day 1
BD still won
i think an EFoL with NK having that passive could be interesting
id like to experiment with neutral numbers too but im not a huge fan on how half of the FoL neutrals are “make sure BD loses” or “make sure evil don’t do very bad”
but i suppose thats the ToL in me talking
That statement is reliant entirely on the stronger NK outweighing having an entire player slot that is entirely outside of the competition
I don’t think it does
Neutrals are not “entirely outside the competition”
they intertwine with the competition and their neutral-agenda pushes clash with the scum-agenda pushes and town-agenda pushes
1 Like
Apparently it’s like saying Yellow is not allied with Red against Blue because not same goals.
Of course you didn’t asked me, but I take my word.
The difference between 16p (widely considered scumsided) and 18p (last games have been strong town wins) is two players.
I want to make this clear before evaluating any problems.
1 Like
Like
Giving extra neutrals swings balance heavily
That’s ~5.5% of the game transferred directly from BD to nontown
No, right now it’s 1-2.
Most people would be interested to see 2-3 neuts instead iirc
… on the other side, most of the fol “neuts” aren’t really neuts but sellswords for either BD or evils, so kinda… not neutral anyways
It is definitely not 1-3
You can make the case that it’s 2-3 because NK is neither uninformed majority or informed minority but 1-3 is just wrong
2 Likes
Also, you’d have to think about “which neuts should be unique and which not” if you go to 2-3 instead. (Rn all neuts are unique)
