1. Boring grinding
2. We’re going to get there all at the same time, and if someone doesn’t manage it, it’s because they’re unlucky or not active.
3. Too easy to team up
4. I’m still against points, I feel they take some of the fun out of the game, I prefer pratical objectives.

CoV

I agree with Kitty.

At most 1 frag per turn.
Plus, it’s very hard to prevent an active gladiator not to get that frag, (at least one gladiator every day will move to a dangerous square, the first one to shove them gets a Frag)
Ergo
The Gladiators with 0 Frags have little winning chances.
Why on hell do they vote FOR?
And from now on we’ll have two months and an half of grind
ing.
After the first week, someone will propose: “let’s add some interesting ways of killing people!”
If it will pass, this will become a luckfest.
After the first two weeks, someone will propose “let’s do 10 Frags instead!”
Or a lot of people will Idle (it is summer and they have no chances after their one week long Idling).
And this victory condition requires also very little strategy. Just kill anyone and avoid walking too near the hazards. If you need, risk getting killed to kill. Wow.
Sorry I’m a little disappointed. :)

Whil Kitty has some points, I wouldn’t vote against something because there will be future proposals I do not like following.

@Hello Kitty: the point you’re missing is that most of the time, the majority of players are not trying to win, and in fact frequently do self-destructive actions. Also, the opposite problem exists, that in nomic the best move (from the point of view of winning) is, nearly always, one that makes the game you’re constructing worse.

mideg: I don’t like the Frags mechanics, and think that no proposal that I come to mind could improve it. This proposal adds the disliked mechanics, so I vote AGAINST it.

ais532: I make a lot of self-destructive moves. My point is, while voting FOR is self-destructive, it will make the game worse too, and between a mechanics that leaves equal possibility to everyone (mine) and this one, people almost unanimously choose this. I just can’t understand.

Well, we would never get any victory condition for any individual win if everyone followed this logic. As there’s usually only one winner, the majority does not win. Thus, they should vote against any victory condition.

Fortunatly, it doesn’t work like this in many cases and we still get victories.