On Sun, 2019-10-20 at 15:07 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Unofficial CONTEST: Subgame in a Rule. > > Ranked-choice voting (ballot should be a list), options are (full > submissions below): > > - ais523 (Fruits of Persistence and Patience) > - Falsifian (Clairvoyant Roshambo) > - Jason Cobb (The Watch) > - G. (Hot Potato) > > MAIN CRITERION: "In order, which of these concepts would you most > like to play, starting next month?" PLEASE ASSUME that > relatively-trivial bugs would be fixed in any final proposed draft. > > Note: Vote is advisory. If there's no clear consensus, I might > discuss ways to break ties (e.g. please include votes for your own, > but I may discard self-votes). No Zombie votes please - won't count > those.
In order: Mine first, because if it isn't the sort of thing I like to play I wouldn't have submitted it. Clairvoyant Roshambo possibly has the most interesting gameplay of the rest, but I'm uncomfortable about the space of the Rules it plays in; it's possible that the whole thing won't work at all, or worse, will force reinterpretations of past precedents in the way that breaks a lot of fundamental gameplay. I didn't understand The Watch at all when it was posted, but I think I understand now; it's basically a case of "make a deal with n players to win, but you won't know whether they plan to uphold their side of the bargain or not until you try to claim the win". I think that, as posted, the penalty for trying and failing is too small (is there anything preventing you immediately rejoining? did you mean to exile player who try and fail?), but that's fixable. Hot Potato has huge timezone issues. I can't see any reason not to pass the potato at just before UTC midnight every day, holding onto it until then, which gives the advantage to players with fast email connections to the Agoran mailservers and who can consistently be awake at UTC midnight. My experience with mechanics like this is that they can ruin the life of anyone who's really trying hard to win. -- ais523
