rlin81 wrote:Bark bark

RAWR (what does that do for the game? Do I automatically win?)

I interpret that as you just declared war on everyone and we should all attack you but others may disagree.

What's diplomacy?

I know a 'Only public chat" game has been played so i want to step it up a notch.

In the pre-game sequence you pick four players. You can only talk to those people. You can only make group chats if all the players picked each other have picked each other. You are allowed to talk to a person not on your list ONLY IF THEY STARTED TO CHAT FIRST. Public enabled, but only stories.

So in theory a really popular person like Janny or roady could be able to talk to everyone, while a not so amazing person, Darkrouge, may only be able to talk to 4 people. I know it's a little unfair, but hey, lifes unfair.

EDIT: Here is a more simple idea, IDC which we play if my idea is picked.

4 chats. You can only make 4 chats. You can speak in any chat you are put in. You can only make 4 chats

mathwhiz9 wrote:

rlin81 wrote:Frozen queen. Your queen must not move ever. You can hire a princess but once she becomes a queen she is again stuck. Not an analogy for old women being stuck at home delivering kids while drillers go out and do the work.

Could that not prompt 3-4 people sending mass amounts of drillers at someone's queen to defeat her?

Yes it could . I think some players might die quickly. I think the primary problem of that game would be how to balance a strong defense with expansion though it could also be possible that through diplomacy your queen is never threatened.

Secret allies. At the start of the game the bottom player choose 3 allies and those players must ally with him but they don't know who he choose as his other 2 ally. The next player up then makes allies until he has 3. If a player has 3 allies already then he can decline an alliance saying he already has 3. Everyone makes exactly 3 allies, unless my math is bad. Can everyone have 3 allies in a 10 player game? Maybe it has to be only with 9 players. Either way the game starts and you can only communicate with your allies and public chat but you can't reveal who your ally is to your other ally and you can't attack your ally no matter what. You can choose to help or not help your ally as you see fit but you cannot attack an enemy of an ally if that enemy is also your ally so in the end your ally is there to help you but you are also racing your ally or if you see your ally as threat and don't want to fight him you can ally with him early on to force him to never attack you. Alternatively you might annoy someone by forcing them in a particular direction by allying with him.

Ok I vote rlin for president. Guy knows what he's doing. This guy has awesome ideas.

radioactivity wrote:Ok I vote rlin for president. Guy knows what he's doing. This guy has awesome ideas.

One problem. His alter ego is "The Riddler" are you sure you want somebody who would add secret meanings into new laws to benefit himself? Wait, thats every politician.... Cary on with the election!

radioactivity wrote:Ok I vote rlin for president. Guy knows what he's doing. This guy has awesome ideas.

Nah specialist joust didn't turn out so well. Game took 3 weeks or so to finish and by then it was mostly people forgotten to move their specialist or almost afked out. I think people purposely died just for it to be over.

rlin81 wrote:Secret allies. At the start of the game the bottom player choose 3 allies and those players must ally with him but they don't know who he choose as his other 2 ally. The next player up then makes allies until he has 3. If a player has 3 allies already then he can decline an alliance saying he already has 3. Everyone makes exactly 3 allies, unless my math is bad. Can everyone have 3 allies in a 10 player game? Maybe it has to be only with 9 players. Either way the game starts and you can only communicate with your allies and public chat but you can't reveal who your ally is to your other ally and you can't attack your ally no matter what. You can choose to help or not help your ally as you see fit but you cannot attack an enemy of an ally if that enemy is also your ally so in the end your ally is there to help you but you are also racing your ally or if you see your ally as threat and don't want to fight him you can ally with him early on to force him to never attack you. Alternatively you might annoy someone by forcing them in a particular direction by allying with him.

Oh this would be soooo complicated. Gotta love the chaos!

nojo34 wrote:What's diplomacy?

I know a 'Only public chat" game has been played so i want to step it up a notch.

In the pre-game sequence you pick four players. You can only talk to those people. You can only make group chats if all the players picked each other have picked each other. You are allowed to talk to a person not on your list ONLY IF THEY STARTED TO CHAT FIRST. Public enabled, but only stories.

So in theory a really popular person like Janny or roady could be able to talk to everyone, while a not so amazing person, Darkrouge, may only be able to talk to 4 people. I know it's a little unfair, but hey, lifes unfair.

EDIT: Here is a more simple idea, IDC which we play if my idea is picked.

4 chats. You can only make 4 chats. You can speak in any chat you are put in. You can only make 4 chats

I really do like this. There are multiple layers of strategy and counter-strategy to the way you pick players.
I think that there's an opportunity to be able to lie about who you're talking to as well. Unfortunately, though, that doesn't work if players can make group chats (Oh, you're talking to X too? Ok, I'll make a group chat. Oh, why can't I?), so maybe the second option is better.
However, I suspect it would be better with less chats/person. Maybe 3?