Disagree that the Warp can’t be beaten. Gameplay aside, Unstable Matter could still enact (it’s 3-for-3 at the time of writing); if it fails there’s still enough time for other proposals to shake the game up in ways that can’t be dismissed by Warp-dwellers as unfairly punitive. A week is a long time in Nomic.

(Actually it’s 4-for-3 with the Imperial DEF.)

The warp dwellers are really good at dismissing things as unfairly punitive!

I don’t know. Yes, UM could pass, but even that only targets fetal artefacts. Even if you wipe those out, 8/20 remaining artefacts are in the warp, with a big handful of the remainder sitting with Tantusar. Collector artefacts are worth double so researchers would need to pay their hands on 16 artefacts to draw level. Meanwhile, no-one else can get to the warp, so they can just keep artefacts on the ground and not worry about anything that targets collections, and generate a couple of new artefacts every few days. Collectors still have an advantage for searches, and with the tiepin can give themselves an advantage on searches as well. Every proposal that even mildly attempts to rebalance the ruleset away from its pro-collector bias gets shot down (and sometimes called “very dumb”, my thoughts on which I’ll save for later).

Pulling Tantusar away from his alliance was a tempting option but their vote on Unstable Matter indicates that they’re not interested in realigning for a solo win. card might betray their alliance and go for a solo win but not in a way that’s going to benefit anybody else. So their voting block is strong, and the number of other players who are engaged with dynastic mechanics is low enough that it is effectively quorum, given Imperial deferentials.

You’re right, it’s Nomic, things can change quickly, but it’s also important to recognise when something is insurmountable and not maintain an endless vanity resistance. Resetting allows minimally-active players the chance to get involved at the ground floor and engage with a new dynasty on its own terms, rather than watching this one petter out over the course of weeks, like a Christmas game of monopoly.

Sure, this is exhausting for me too

as similar as this proposal looks to a “let the cabal win” proposal I hope from Josh’s comment that it’s at least slightly distinct. I don’t know how much fun the outsiders are having but they seem to be waiting for the next dynasty. If enough people want to play this out then, sure we can.
Also not going to vote against because I didn’t do all those wikipage edits for nothing

[Josh] I’d like to note I’ve been polite as far as discourse goes.

@card - You absolutely have, and I don’t want to imply otherwise. Apologies if the implication was that you hadn’t been.

Although feeling routinely disgusted with bampam (even my own, which is why I try to design dynasties that avoid it) isn’t a new thing around here, I’d like to apologize for my choice of words.

I mean, I admit my bampam, I find it disgusting too, and the fact that bampam exists and that I am disgusted by it in general is why I try to design dynasties that avoid it.

[Josh] Yeah, I also had a small moment of revelation at Cuddlebeam’s “very dumb” line.

This all seems unduly pessimistic, particularly when Unstable Matter - a directly punitive proposal against two players - is currently on course to enact. Getting through obliquely punitive proposals, or ones that benefit a larger group (“everyone can move to the Warp”), can only be easier than that.

Aesthetically, “playername wins” is a drab way to end this when we explicitly added a variable to use in exactly such a situation. We could just bring the February 5th end date forward by a week.

by principle, feels very defeatist… Which I’m at least a little guilty of.

[That being said, Cuddlebeam is currently out at a 9 Attainment lead over Brendan, the next one down, by my reckoning. If Cuddlebeam is going to win anyway I don’t feel it matters whether it’s by consensus or by deadline.]

To be clear, by the way, I am not and have never been allied with Cuddlebeam. The proposals that improved or damaged his standing in the game were also, for the most part, ones that would improve or damage mine in kind.

A deadline would give everyone a chance to finish any plans they’d started, and would explicitly tie the victory to the gamestate (if someone made a mistake in calculations, that would be reflected). A consensus would give the victory to whoever appeared to be in front at the point of proposal, even if they wouldn’t have won by the deadline, or had made a fatal error earlier in the game. Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages.

sk per Kevan - I don’t think that this is a bad dynasty ruleset, just a heavily skewed one that a blocking group of players won’t allow to be fixed, and as such it doesn’t really deserve to be unceremoniously chopped off. With only a week left on the clock we might as well see it out.

Tantusar, if you want any help winning solo then I’m prepared to pitch in, hmu

@Tantusar - decaying fetal artefacts, when they have many and you have none and only they can generate more, is by definition a proposal that benefits you and damages them. I partly proposed it as a straightforward test of whether you could be induced by self-interest; your vote against it is what persuaded me that you couldn’t!

It was a dumb vote and I realise that much n- OH WAIT IT’S STILL OPEN

bloody hell this is a silly dynasty

?