Post by Vester Lombard on Feb 7, 2016 16:49:48 GMT
I'm debating if the Snitch's value should be reduced. Maybe is should only be worth only 5 points (basically 0, but it breaks ties). With these mechanics it's hard to take a lead by 40 points to guarantee a victory so the winner of the game will most often be solely determined by whoever catches the Snitch, whether or not they were winning the game at the time. But if we change the snitch to 5 points, the rest of the team needs to make sure your team is ahead before catching the Snitch, making it more of a team effort and less reliant on one player's good roll. Also, currently it's always a good idea to go for the Snitch. If we change it to 5 points, the seeker is taking more of a risk and basing their decisions on whether or not they think your team will be ahead at the end of the period. I think this would be a much more competitive and cooperative way to play, making all positions matter equally. On the other side of the coin, this would make the snitch useless in the 4th period because if no one catches the snitch, the team with the most points wins anyway.
Maybe there is no Snitch in the 4th period? Maybe a compromise of 15 or 25 points is best? Maybe we keep it exactly the way it is?
Post by Quinn Starling on Feb 7, 2016 17:15:10 GMT
Seeing such high rolls so early, I knew the game would likely end in the second round. Maybe no snitch in the whole first half? If people want to enjoy playing the other parts of the game longer, that is. Maybe the Seeker could have a +2 skill instead of a +1 but only have it available for the first half?
By that point, the 35 point value would make sense, giving both teams a fair opportunity to score with chasing. This would also ensure a team focus, similar to making it only worth 5 points.
35 does seem high, though. But maybe it should be higher or equal to the points for each hoop? Maybe points for catching the snitch should vary each round?
So, say we have no snitch in the first two rounds. Seeker can use +2 to whatever other skill. In this situation, I think the snitch should be worth 30-35 since there's been at least three (counting the whole third round) rounds to chase and score.
Say we instead alter the value of the snitch each round. I still think it should be unavailable for at least one round. One lucky roll ending the game round one seems like premature climax Lol So, round one, no snitch. Seeker can use regular +1 skill. Starting round two, snitch is available and worth less than by the end. The more time that goes on for players to score by chasing, the higher the value of the snitch goes. This would mean a lot more consideration and strategy placed on WHEN to seek compared to how many points you've scored so far.
I think either it's worth keeping the snitch at this value or docking its value slightly. We've only had one game so far, but based on this first game, I think it's almost a necessary component. However Quarter 1 goes creates momentum for the rest of the game, 10 pt. lead with 5 extra IP's on the other side sets the other team back, making Q2 comeback that much more difficult.
We'll have to see how it runs over more games. I'm sure there's an ideal value out there for capturing the snitch, we'll find it through testing.
I think this would reduce the likelihood that a Seeker would attempt going for the Snitch early on, because they don't know if their team is winning. It also keeps the comeback mechanic in late game to make sure the game is competitive.
Another idea is that the Seeker has 2 action options (Let's call them Search and Catch). The Snitch DC starts at Very Hard and does not decrease each period. Instead a Seeker has to use Search actions to hopefully decrease the DC of the Snitch to increase their odds when they use the Catch action. This would give the Seeker more things to do early game, but also delay when the Snitch is actually caught so the game is less likely to end prematurely.
Post by Vester Lombard on Feb 10, 2016 2:50:16 GMT
Another Snitch option:
There are no Seek actions. During the game, Seekers are more of a well-rounded player at the other positions. At the end of 3 periods, the Seek phase begins. Each Seeker rolls to catch the Snitch, adding +2 for every 10 points his/her team is leading the game. The player who catches the snitch wins the game.
This would obviously end in much more random results, but it's worth thinking about.
Walltur: Mmk, I can see that now
Mar 17, 2016 15:19:37 GMT
Vester Lombard: Beating a seeker in the 4th is pretty huge. Each IP is essentially erasing the effect of one of their successful searches.
Mar 17, 2016 16:28:34 GMT
Quinn Starling: Yeah, I would have hit Ginger more if I thought she'd rest up or if you'd heal her. But I figured that you guys would maybe leave her at 2 since that was her max, especially since we decided to stay inujurred, too Lol
Mar 17, 2016 16:36:34 GMT
Quinn Starling: We planned back between periods 2-3 to consider staying injured if we got to -3 again, to waste any coming beatings. If you aim for low DCs, have enough skill to make up for the IP, AND get lucky, it's sometimes worth it to keep the damage & keep rolling
Mar 17, 2016 17:34:53 GMT
Vester Lombard: I think in the 2nd period you definitely have to rest. 3rd period, maybe, pending your team strategy. 4th period, probably not.
Mar 17, 2016 21:14:43 GMT
Sprye Tatel: In the interest of not adding a new post each day to the Space Debate threads, would we be interested in sharing ideas via Google Docs? tinyurl.com/zlk8sb3
Mar 21, 2016 5:01:20 GMT
Quinn Starling: I'm in favor of death penalty for illegal pretty floral bonnets. I think that needs to be an argument that happens Lol
Mar 21, 2016 13:54:41 GMT
Walltur: Pro, but under the argument that all viewers of the bonnet be executed, rather than the wearer. Deadly illegal bonnets
Mar 22, 2016 4:16:02 GMT
Quinn Starling: Depends on how pretty. We'd need a numerical rating scale, to start. Any bonnet rated 6 or over (by 2/3 vote of galactic council) is determined "pretty" and a single flower may be defined as "floral." Any fixture worn upon the head may serve as "bonnet."
Mar 22, 2016 15:54:13 GMT
Quinn Starling: (that's on a scale of 1-10) And I'd be against death penalty for illegal ones (unregistered, obtained illegally, etc.) Jail sentencing and community work are appropriate, but not death penalty. Too extreme.
Mar 22, 2016 15:56:18 GMT
Vester Lombard: While I am against the death penalty for pretty floral bonnets, I do think that all people who have encountered the bonnet should have their brains slightly melted. I think this would both save lives and prevent any risk of spreading that fashion
Mar 22, 2016 16:25:34 GMT
Sprye Tatel: Again with the slightly-melting brains proposal? Seems very convenient for the Muppet-race; who can re-grow/stuff brain cells! Whose pocket are you in? Who is pulling your strings!?
Mar 22, 2016 17:16:41 GMT
Sprye Tatel: I say that the punishment should fit the crime: The penalty for Pretty Floral Bonnet's (PFB's) should be death by PFB!
Mar 22, 2016 17:19:46 GMT
Quinn Starling: I have found my people. This is where I belong <3
Mar 22, 2016 23:08:03 GMT
Walltur: Any games coming down the pipe? Online practice game of Cornucopia?
Apr 6, 2016 15:19:22 GMT
Vester Lombard: If you guys want we could try doing some online Galactic Debate. It would lose a bit of the spontaneous improv element when played on the forum, but maybe it could at least help figure out which cards are fun or boring.
Apr 11, 2016 16:36:36 GMT
Quinn Starling: We could schedule a "live" session and either skype or have the speaker type up their response within a certain time frame. So, speaker says they're free at 9pm. At 8:55 they're given their topic, then they have from 9:00-9:05 to type up their platform...?
Apr 11, 2016 17:53:36 GMT