I kind of like the negative medals. Maybe it is because I have never betrayed anyone. I don't plan on betraying anyone either.

I have noticed a lot of people say the game is all about betrayal. The people who betray me always say that too. The ones who betray me have told me "it is not a kiddie game", "it is called subterfuge for a reason", and one guy just said "nothing personal" (I didn't mind that one so much actually)

Yes you can betray someone and it works out well in-game but the backstabber medal is well deserved and helps players like me not trust you.

Agreed. This automatically gives players an advantage/disadvantage from the start of a game, leaving less room for diplomacy. If I see someone is trustworthy or a backstabber based on their medals, I'm already more inclined to treat them a certain way, no matter what they have to say. I feel like the whole idea contradicts the premise of subterfuge.

Also—since not everyone is able/willing to expend the extra cash for medals, it skews the whole system. Maybe I've betrayed dozens of people who just weren't willing to shell out for a backstab medal. It's unfair if player x betrays one person who happens to be willing to purchase a negative medal in retaliation.

Uncertainty and mistrust are part of the fun of the game. I don't want to be able to make assumptions about players based on anything but past games and word of mouth.

I can only think of one player that I'd even consider giving the turd to, and even then, it's not worth it. And I'm fully against giving turds to backstabbers.
So what that means is that I am someone who would use the turd responsibly, but also that I will never use the turd. Which means that the only people who will use the turd will be people who are irresponsible with the turd.

hey everyone,

thanks for raising your concerns, they are certainly valid. the idea of increasing the price substantially is a possibility, as is getting rid of those medals entirely. regardless, since i'm going on vacation, it will take us longer than usual to get to this, but i wanted to let you all know we hear ya, and it's on our list to figure out a better way to handle these.

ron

ron wrote:hey everyone,

thanks for raising your concerns, they are certainly valid. the idea of increasing the price substantially is a possibility, as is getting rid of those medals entirely. regardless, since i'm going on vacation, it will take us longer than usual to get to this, but i wanted to let you all know we hear ya, and it's on our list to figure out a better way to handle these.

ron

Thanks for the quick response!
And I honestly don't think that it's a problem for you to let the problem sit while you take a break. It lets the situation play out for a time. We can see for certain if the turd will be used appropriately, and by the time you come back, we'll have a better idea of the situation.

I also am apprehensive about the idea of these negative medals. In my opinion, what happens in one game should be left in that game when it's finished. While betrayal is not necessary to the game, part of the fun is the paranoia that's involved with trusting your allies. Lately I've felt that I can't betray anyone because it'll ruin my future games. The medals seem to be completely at odds with the new anonymous feature that's been implemented. One gives you no prior knowledge of your opponent, and the other gives you way to much.

we chatted about this a bit and our current thinking is to only have one negative medal, and call it something less damning. like the YOU MADE ME ANGRY medal. that way it's clear what it means, and it doesn't directly reflect on the player receiving it, more on the player giving it (for some unspecified reason).

ron wrote:we chatted about this a bit and our current thinking is to only have one negative medal, and call it something less damning. like the YOU MADE ME ANGRY medal. that way it's clear what it means, and it doesn't directly reflect on the player receiving it, more on the player giving it (for some unspecified reason).

Yeah, that sounds like a solid solution. People may not buy it if it's less harsh, but maybe that's in the best interest for the game.

Instead of removing them, we should just be given the option to hide them. So someone can give it to you to make a point, then it's up to u if you want to keep that up as a funny badge of honor, or if you want to hide it for strategic/reputation reasons.

gardengnome wrote:I kind of like the negative medals. Maybe it is because I have never betrayed anyone. I don't plan on betraying anyone either.

I have noticed a lot of people say the game is all about betrayal. The people who betray me always say that too. The ones who betray me have told me "it is not a kiddie game", "it is called subterfuge for a reason", and one guy just said "nothing personal" (I didn't mind that one so much actually)

Yes you can betray someone and it works out well in-game but the backstabber medal is well deserved and helps players like me not trust you.

You should watch this trailer, the message is clear: subterfuge, a game all about betrayal. According to you all the characters in it except the bald guy would deserve a Traitor medal, even though they are supposed to incarnate lambda players.
Maybe a "You made me angry!" title would be more okay, but the option to hide it proposed by kevlargolem definitely seems like the perfect solution to me.