Quote:
IndyPendant said:
I think the Secret Enemy thing would cover that. I mean, think about it: if one evil player gets eliminated early, then another evil player has met one of its conditions. But which one is it?
The six evil players remaining that have *not* met the kill-their-target condition are going to try to make sure the Good Team is not killed--at least, not until they kill their target, because they lose if that happens!
Meanwhile, the seventh evil player, the one whose enemy is dead, is going to have to play a bit carefully to keep from giving away that he's the safe one...all the while concentrating on killing the Good Alliance before any other evil players are eliminated. Perhaps he would even be forced to come to the aid of another evil player about to be eliminated, because he would then have to 'share' his win! --All the while wondering "Am I saving the guy that wants me dead?"
It's just too perfect. ; )
|
Yes this is exactly what makes the Secret enemies idea work and 'balances' the game. All the Evils can't just knock out good unless they have fullfilled their victory condition or are close to doing so. Even if no evil players have been knocked out there is no point in a weaker evil player helping the other evils overcome good if he is not next to his secret enemy at least.
Also about balance - this is a bit of an experiment and its also meant to involve a bit more RP than the usual MP game. For those people who are super competitive or real MinMaxers then just about every other game offered on the board might be better for you? If you want allies play Good. If you want Tartarians & dabble in blood play evil. If it turns out to be a bit unbalanced and the goods go down early (or win easily) we will all know it for next time.
Re: Global War, recruiting!
Threaded Mode