Saturday, May 10, 2025

Proposal: A More Meaningful Round of Play

In the rule “Guards and Burglars”, after the text “and also had more Successes than every other Agent immediately prior to the most recent Breaking In action,” add the following text:

and also gained more than 1 Fame or 1 Infamy in the most recent Breaking In action,

A little less broken than my previous proposal. The near-winner just needs to gain Fame or Infamy. It’s possible for everyone else to gang up and stop them, but it would take some serious coordination, and it’s still possible for the near-winner to win even with everyone else working against them.

Comments

Clucky: he/him

10-05-2025 18:13:17 UTC

Infamy is really easy for burgs to obtain. Just pop in for one round and hope you don’t get caught (it if you can, distract at that point)

JonathanDark: he/him

10-05-2025 18:22:09 UTC

It’s that “hope” part that gives folks a chance to thwart it.

I’m not trying to make it too hard for the near-winner to win. I’m just trying to make the possibly-last round more interesting by giving the rest of the players a chance to keep the game going.

JonathanDark: he/him

10-05-2025 18:26:16 UTC

I updated it to require gaining more than 1 Fame or 1 Infamy, so that stops the “11 Grounds, 1 Ingress” gain.

DoomedIdeas: he/him

10-05-2025 22:11:34 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

10-05-2025 22:37:30 UTC

for

ais523:

10-05-2025 22:44:03 UTC

Repeating my comment from “Acceleration”:

The likely outcome of this proposal when the almost-winner is a Burglar without Fame/Infamy is that the Guards guard three randomly chosen Ingresses and the other Burglars don’t bother trying to steal artifacts. That basically turns the game into a straight 25%-win, 75%-we-wasted-our-time, rather than following the actual dynastic gameplay.

When the almost-winner is a Burglar with Fame/Infamy, you get a similar pattern except that the almost-winner has much better chances.

When the almost-winner is a Guard, things get complicated: the Burglars can deny the Fame reward by submitting Grounds*12, but then the almost-winner gets further ahead.

Or I guess my main concern is that team play doesn’t function correctly in almost-winner situations under A More Meaningful Round of Play: Fame and Infamy are individual rather than team stats, so the almost-winner’s team doesn’t have a reason to cooperate with each other, and the dynasty’s mechanics don’t function properly.

ais523:

10-05-2025 22:45:18 UTC

I am not sure which way I will vote on this proposal, though. It is possible that we could change the Fame and Infamy mechanics to make the game meaningful despite there being no incentives to play as a team, but the game currently isn’t balanced for it.

ais523:

10-05-2025 23:00:49 UTC

(For example, what will happen this round, if this proposal passes and there are no other rules changes: I win 25% of the time, each other Burglar without Infamy gains 1-2 Infamy 25% of the time,
and each other Burglar with Infamy gains 1 Infamy guaranteed. Some number of the Guards get fame, pretty much at random because the Burglars have no incentive to do anything other than pick random Ingresses – and although the other Burglars have an incentive to pick Ingresses that I’m not picking, I have no reason to tell them which Ingresses those are. This is not interesting gameplay.)

You must be logged in as a player to post comments.