Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Call for Judgment: Realism

Quorumed 7-2 -Darth. Goodbye, Dynasty.

Adminned at 07 Oct 2009 11:50:14 UTC

Repeal all Dynastic Rules. Start a new Dynasty with no Leader. This Dynasty is named “The Fifth Metadynasty.”

To tell the truth? Without some ridiculous deus ex machinas, we all would have starved (actually, thirsted to death) long ago. I think the appropriate finale (fair to all) is a Meta.

Comments

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:12:28 UTC

for

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:13:30 UTC

against Nonsense. If all humans starve, the best zombie wins. This CfJ is nothing but a pathetic last resort to avoid recognizing that simple truth.

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:14:56 UTC

Don’t jones with me, I’m a zombie too (and the best one, imho). And speaking from this perspective, I am being perfectly honest when I say that I NEED FOOD TOO! And the Brains of my fallen foes only last so long.

ais523:

10-06-2009 20:15:57 UTC

for It’s not the case that the best zombie wins, unfortunately; because of the stupid simplicity of the way the zombie rules are written, the spammiest zombie wins. The only stat that matters for a zombie is Contribution, the only ways to get that down are eating, proposing, and attacking non-Infected Survivors. Therefore, the best strategy for winning is to do all of those as often as possible; all the actions but proposing give you guaranteed Contribution regardless of the results, so the end result is a boring grind to the finish.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:16:11 UTC

Best zombie? You helped the living whenever you could, traitor!

ais523:

10-06-2009 20:17:37 UTC

Oh, another note: the reason the deus ex machina in particular passed is that without it, it was obvious that arth (then) would win, so it was in everyone else’s interest to vote FOR. Likewise, the same effect could prolong the dynasty more or less indefinitely; you could always find some effect or another that would screw up the current leader and benefit everyone else, and pass it on that basis.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:19:00 UTC

@ais: That should have made the living work harder. Your attempts to over-regulate the zombie faction, without actually coming up with an interesting way to help the living achieve victory, didn’t really make any sense.

Again, are you somehow thinking that zombies should have achieved victory through their wit and political manipulations?

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:20:23 UTC

I hardly helped the living; I ate their food, drank their water, did very little fighting, and punching them in the face on a few occasions (and then eating their exposed Brains). Idk what you’re talking about.

Ienpw III:

10-06-2009 20:20:34 UTC

for

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:21:39 UTC

@ais: Uhm, was it obvious that I would have won? Why don’t people tell me that earlier? I wasn’t even trying to win! (In fact the very first proposal I made on this dynasty barred me from winning quite effectively. For some reason, others worked to create several workaround against this self-imposed safeguard)

Josh:

10-06-2009 20:24:40 UTC

against

ais523:

10-06-2009 20:25:09 UTC

Any dynasty in which the win occurs purely through grinding is a bad one. Having an obvious and simple winning tactic for the zombies just doesn’t make for a fun game, so yes, I’m saying that zombie play should be more interesting.

Bucky:

10-06-2009 20:27:17 UTC

against .  Let’s sort this out by proposal after Hiatus.

ais523:

10-06-2009 20:28:35 UTC

@arthexis: Yes, it was obvious to anyone who’d actually bothered to read the rules that you’d win; there was no rules-based way to stop you at all with the existing rules, no real recourse other than emergency-passing a proposal to stop your victory condition happening, and there wouldn’t have been time for a separate proposal to change the rules such that you did’t win. Therefore, all you’d have had to have done would be to gain as much negative Contribution as possible by grinding. (I know this might not have been what you intended, or what anyone else intended; but it’s how the dynasty turned out). Qwaz has now made up about 2 weeks of Contribution gap against you simply by playing effectively while you sat back and made nonsensical proposals; it’s no longer the case that you’re necessarily going to win if there’s a zombie victory, therefore. Even if it wasn’t obvious, though, it should have been…

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:28:49 UTC

@ais: Most of your proposed rules where long winded and boring, so I don’t know what to think about you opinion on what constitutes a fun game.

Furthermore, the barbarian dynasty was purely grinding, yet it was very fun. Millions of MMORPG players will likely disagree with your statement.

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:28:56 UTC

We’d have to be very careful that someone doesn’t win in the interim . . . and the Cult mechanic has been effectively destroyed. . . .

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:30:39 UTC

@ais: Myself? I hat grinding. I’d never do it. Not even if I was paid for it. I will keep making grinding rules for the fools that like following through them, though :)

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:31:34 UTC

Hat grinding doesn’t sound like fun.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:32:04 UTC

@Qwaz: The Cult mechanic was always flawed. It would have only worked with a very active emperor, and if it was a central point of a attention. On this dynasty, it was but an afterthought, an idea that diluted what little consistency the theme had.

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:34:13 UTC

This theme is waaaaay more consistent than anything we’ve had lately. Who doubts that a new religious cult would spring up if a bunch of zombies started attacking people?

But yeah, it’s broken. We should probably eliminate it; or at least, switch up the Cultists in a way that isn’t announced on the blog.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:36:36 UTC

@Qwaz: It doesn’t matter, the dynasty is ending now, some way or another.

(BTW, the only logical solution is for me to achieve victory, of course)

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:38:19 UTC

Dynasty doesn’t have to end now, it just probably will because of the number of spam victory claims. And Metadynasty seems like the fairest way to go, as always.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:38:53 UTC

for CoV. It just struck me that if there is a meta dynasty no one can veto my proposals! And this CfJ has a fair chance of passing, so it’s more like a free ticket to my unavoidable victory in the near future! Mwahahaha!

Qwazukee:

10-06-2009 20:42:01 UTC

You’re right, you will have a fair chance of winning (along with everyone else) if there is a Metadynasty. Congrats.

arthexis:

10-06-2009 20:44:27 UTC

Hehe…

spikebrennan:

10-06-2009 21:45:48 UTC

against

Klisz:

10-07-2009 02:12:16 UTC

against  per Bucky.

Ienpw III:

10-07-2009 02:23:36 UTC

CoV per Bucky against

Darknight:

10-07-2009 02:59:16 UTC

against

Josh:

10-07-2009 06:54:08 UTC

COV:  for

Josh:

10-07-2009 06:54:33 UTC

(This dynasty isn’t getting back up. Might as well hit the ole reset button.)

Ienpw III:

10-07-2009 10:51:04 UTC

CoV again for per Josh.

Qwazukee:

10-07-2009 11:35:38 UTC

Currently passing 5-4.

arthexis:

10-07-2009 13:46:51 UTC

But we should call it the First Metadynasty of arthexis! *ducks!*

spikebrennan:

10-07-2009 18:28:50 UTC

COV for

Klisz:

10-07-2009 18:45:22 UTC

for  CoV, but we need to think of a theme for the meta.