Monday, March 26, 2012

Proposal: High Risk High Reward

Timed out 2 votes to 6 with one unresolved DEF (from the Net). Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Mar 2012 01:45:35 UTC

Append this text to the rule “Institutions”:

The Casino: All players who direct any amount of resources that is greater than 0 towards the Casino influence it. If there is only one player who influences the Casino during a cycle all of those player’s resources, even those that were not directed towards the Casino, are doubled at the start of the next cycle. If there are multiple players who influence the casino during a cycle all of those players’ resources, even those that were not directed towards the Casino, are halved at the start of the next cycle. No players lose any resources directed towards the casino.

The Casino adds a “high risk high reward” element to the gameplay, if ever there is a player who is really low on resources, they have a chance to jump right back into the game, they just have to read their opponents well.
Also, take note of the following rule: “If both contradicting parts are a Core Rule, or if both of them are a Dynastic Rule, the part with more limited scope applies.”

posted by Patrick at 26 Mar 2012 02:11:34 UTC Comments (13)

Comments

Murphy:

26-03-2012 02:22:58 UTC

for

omd:

26-03-2012 02:54:53 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

26-03-2012 07:06:50 UTC

against doubling can get out of hand fast…

Josh: Observer he/they

26-03-2012 07:13:15 UTC

against Regressive.

Kevan: he/him

26-03-2012 09:53:21 UTC

for Too many exceptions to the basic bidding system, but it seems risky enough not to get out of hand.

Kevan: he/him

26-03-2012 13:01:00 UTC

against CoV, on reflection. One lucky bid could be too much of a game-changer, once we’ve racked up resources. And it does become more about luck than bluffing, when you’re up against fifteen other players.

southpointingchariot:

26-03-2012 15:21:43 UTC

imperial The concept seems cool, but wording and overpowering remain barriers to a good time :)

Clucky: he/him

26-03-2012 16:26:11 UTC

For anyone still thinking this is at all a good idea due to the risk involved, remember someone can just take the court house and prevent anyone else from influencing the casino the next round. As there are no punishments for going after the court house, it essentially turns into the casino with normal bidding requirements, just delayed by a round.

southpointingchariot:

26-03-2012 16:27:47 UTC

@Clucky - the courthouse can only forbid a single player from influencing an institution. The Reactor turns off an institution.

ChronosPhaenon:

26-03-2012 19:16:53 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

26-03-2012 19:29:51 UTC

Ah, okay, I read it wrong. Still think its not balanced enough.

Yonah:

26-03-2012 20:39:02 UTC

against Too much potential to become the only thing that affects victory. It would be better if only the resources directed at the casino were doubled/halved, although still potentially game breaking.

Patrick:

26-03-2012 21:42:37 UTC

Hmm… what would be everyone’s opinions on only doubling/halving credits as opposed to all resources?