Michael Kelley writes: >Exactly. In Sinister, destroying a Homeworld across the table from me >doesn't give me any kind of reward. It's a penalty, really: I have to >sacrifice ships in order to keep myself in the game. Except that you don't have to -- because freqently, you have a choice between setting yourself up to stop a win and setting yourself up to, you know, win. >> Seems like the simplest hack would just be "first player whose prey is >> eliminated wins". That way, you might very well want to aid the >> person who's trying to eliminate you (just as you don't want to >> eliminate them), but you don't have the "quick, can anybody -else- >> kill them? > >The first time I ever played Sinister, we tried using that rule, and it made >the game even more unintuitive. "Wait, so... You're trying to destroy my >Homeworld. I sacrifice my ships in order to blow up your homeworld first... >and I don't win? *He* wins? Huh?" I don't find it unintuitive, but it seems like you'd be happier playing "last man standing". >IMO, the underlying problem with Sinister is that it has a single victory >condition, and no way to share victory. What I really *want* in a >multiplayer Homeworlds game is a Diplomacy element. Whereas I don't want that much of a diplomacy element; if all games have full-on diplomacy, all games will be Diplomacy. >> I could see using a Vampire-like scoring system (the "Jyhad" card game >> was renamed to "Vampire, the Eternal Struggle" over a decade ago), >> though I could totally see a cycle of death -- as eliminating someone >> really does weaken you quite a bit. Mabye if you got to take all >> their remaining ships? (that would be way strong, but not necessarily >> too strong). >I can see what you mean about a cycle of death. And I agree, taking over >the eliminated player's ships would be way strong. But it makes logical >sense, and it could introduce another interesting strategy element: Do you >go after a strong Captain with a big fleet... and potentially gain a lot of >ships as the spoils? Or do you go after a weak Captain with a smaller >fleet... and gain fewer ships? *nod* This would be interesting, though, of course, the problem with eliminating someone with a lot of ships is that they'll probably launch a final strike at you, which may result in mutual elimination. That said, I like "inherit all remaining ships controlled by someone you kill" better than "gain points when you kill." -- Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,) --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;' /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\ /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-'