The Dynastic Reset is now complete, I think.

My current thoughts on style (which may be adapted to mirror Josh better):

Proposal style: a mix of a) implementing new mechanics, and b) trying to close loopholes (including pre-emptively). Balance fixes (that are unrelated to loophole closing) are possible but I don’t expect them to be a major focus for my proposal-writing.

Player protection: this is (intended to be) a team-based dynasty, with the teams shuffled every now and then. I intend to be more protective of participants who are currently on my team than on Josh’s, expecting Josh to do the opposite, so that all participants have a Mastermind protecting them. In particular, if Josh’s team is larger than mine and tries to use their numbers to force through a proposal that is detrimental to my team, that will likely prompt me to use my veto.

Desired workload: no big update actions; I’m OK with tracking secret information.

Attitude to scams: I am happy to try to scam points for my team, but will try to close loopholes as I find them. As for dynasty-ending scams, one of the themes of this dynasty is “potentially dangerous/scammable mechanics which the Masterminds try to make unexploitable, but are hoping that someone manages to find an exploit anyway”. In other words – we are going to try to stop you, but would love to see you succeed despite that.

Information sharing: because the Masterminds are always on opposite teams, it’s unlikely that any mistake in the gamestate would benefit both of them. I’ll be trying to correct mistakes if having them incorrect is detrimental to my team, on the assumption that Josh would be doing the same.

Predictability: mostly Instinctual, with elements of Methodical mixed in, but I may change style if necessary to keep the dynasty balanced between the two Masterminds.

My Imperial Styles statement, which I similarly reserve the right to move based on how things play out between me and ais:

Provocateur, in the sense that major new mechanics will always be more interesting to me than loopholes.

I will also act primarily to defend my team, but beyond that I won’t be worrying about game balance at all.

Desired workload: I don’t mind running the odd update action or reconcilliation. ais and I keeping secret info from each other is an interesting game space to me.

Scams: We expect dilligent attacks and will be working to put up strong defences.

Information sharing: I have an ideological opposition to the idea of leaving incorrect gamestate uncorrected, when I notice.

Predictability: Given that teams will vary I will try to be methodical.

OK, I think I’ll also be correcting incorrect gamestate if I notice it, even if doing so doesn’t benefit my team at all. I don’t think any other change is needed: our styles match pretty well.