所有案件
Inside Job 的案件
#172376: "Random roles"
implemented: 此建議已獲實施
1
這是關於哪方面的案件?
發生什麼事? 請從下方選擇
建議:依我所見,有些調整將大幅增進遊戲完成度
細節描述
• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議,以便讓人一目了然。
Would be nice to have an option added to have a random roles option for role 1 and 2.
Could be nice feature to play on arena or tournaments to have a variaty on roles and not always play with the same roles.
Then you can have a fixed role 1 and a random role 2.
Or random role 1 and role 2 on none.
Then arena can have some changed formats what could be cool.• 你的瀏覽器是什麼?
Google Chrome v137
案件沿革
arrie1987 • 此建議尚未被開發者分析過:
2025年 6月12日 9:31 • Would be nice to have an option added to have a random roles option for role 1 and 2.
Could be nice feature to play on arena or tournaments to have a variaty on roles and not always play with the same roles. Or also on a single play that you randomise the roles.
Then you can have a fixed role 1 and a random role 2 for example.
Or random role 1 and role 2 on none.
Then arena for example can have some changed formats what could be cool.
Could be nice feature to play on arena or tournaments to have a variaty on roles and not always play with the same roles. Or also on a single play that you randomise the roles.
Then you can have a fixed role 1 and a random role 2 for example.
Or random role 1 and role 2 on none.
Then arena for example can have some changed formats what could be cool.
Mizutismask • 開發者認為這並非好主意,或投資報酬率過低:
2025年 6月12日 16:13 • Random is not suitable here, because some couples don’t play well together, and some are not even allowed. Look at the rules to see how they match to make an interesting game.
Thomas • 開發者認為這並非好主意,或投資報酬率過低:
2025年 6月16日 1:47 •
2025年 6月26日 15:54 • I understand, that some combinations don’t play well. As you suggested, I read the rulebook, and it say:
„We recommend using only one special role card per game in the beginning and a maximum of two as you become more and more familiar with how to play using them. If you incorporate two special role cards, it is important to avoid choosing two roles that are revealed at the start of the game (Bugged Agent, The Accomplice) or have two NEUTRAL roles (The Decoy, The Accomplice, Tim Shady) in play.“
Taking that in kind, it should be possible to
1. play without special roles. (already possible)
2. play with 1 or 2 special roles, selected by the table creator. (already possible)
3. play with 1 special role, selected randomly.
4. play with Prof. No (instead of the Insider) and 1 random special roles.
5. play with 2 special roles, selected randomly, but with the following restrictions:
a) if the first role is Bugged Agent, the second must not be The Accomplice.
b) if the first is The Accomplice, the second must not be Bugged Agent.
c) if the first is a neutral role, the second must not be a neutral role.
That should ensure, that any random combinations of two special roles respect the restriction of the offical rulebook.
This could not avoid, that some combinations will make it easier for the agents or the insider to win, but the rulebook says that we should „try different combinations to find out which ones you have the most fun with.“ As it is up to the table creator to create a table with 2 random special roles, he/she should be aware of the risk, that a random combination can change balance between agents and insider.
But even if you don’t want to implement an option to use 2 random special roles, I don’t see any reason, why not at least allow an option to play with just 1 single random role.
„We recommend using only one special role card per game in the beginning and a maximum of two as you become more and more familiar with how to play using them. If you incorporate two special role cards, it is important to avoid choosing two roles that are revealed at the start of the game (Bugged Agent, The Accomplice) or have two NEUTRAL roles (The Decoy, The Accomplice, Tim Shady) in play.“
Taking that in kind, it should be possible to
1. play without special roles. (already possible)
2. play with 1 or 2 special roles, selected by the table creator. (already possible)
3. play with 1 special role, selected randomly.
4. play with Prof. No (instead of the Insider) and 1 random special roles.
5. play with 2 special roles, selected randomly, but with the following restrictions:
a) if the first role is Bugged Agent, the second must not be The Accomplice.
b) if the first is The Accomplice, the second must not be Bugged Agent.
c) if the first is a neutral role, the second must not be a neutral role.
That should ensure, that any random combinations of two special roles respect the restriction of the offical rulebook.
This could not avoid, that some combinations will make it easier for the agents or the insider to win, but the rulebook says that we should „try different combinations to find out which ones you have the most fun with.“ As it is up to the table creator to create a table with 2 random special roles, he/she should be aware of the risk, that a random combination can change balance between agents and insider.
But even if you don’t want to implement an option to use 2 random special roles, I don’t see any reason, why not at least allow an option to play with just 1 single random role.
為本案件添加內容
任何可能重現這項錯誤或了解你的建議之相關資訊,都請在此填寫:
- 其他同樣狀況的桌號/步數
- 按 F5 是否解決了這個問題?
- 問題是否發生了好幾次?每次都發生?時好時壞?
- 建議將此錯誤的螢幕截圖上傳到 Imgur.com 並轉貼連結。