Of interest to all players in 2 x 3 games (2 players with 3 factions each)

[Googlie]

The question arises where there are only 2 players in a game, each controlling 3 factions:

Is it reasonable to allow the use of Governorship elections (which essentially gives infiltration on 3 factions to the other three)

Council can be disabled in the scenario rules (but that also disables solar shields, unity core goodies, etc etc) so i have not disabled in the games I've set up.

Should players respect that intent, and not call elections, or does anything go?

(without trying to influence any votes, I voted for option #3)

[Chaos Theory]

Heh, I probably caused this in my FCT game. That would explain why the turn hasn't come around yet

I'll refrain from voting because it's obviously in my interest to win elections in FCT. I achieved my vote advantage through two things:

One of my factions is Lal. One of his perks is better control of the governorship. Without that, he becomes slightly weaker.
My population is decent, though slightly below my opponent's. If I had failed to tend to my population, I would not be in a position to win the governorship.

[Chaunk]

It's the same for both players, bring it on. Win some, lose some. If your opponenent has a larger pop, then go take it from him/her!

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Chaunk
It's the same for both players, bring it on. Win some, lose some. If your opponenent has a larger pop, then go take it from him/her!

I can't believe I'm agreeing with Chaunk again !?! However, my thought/ angle on the subject would be that some players would choose certain Factions to play in order to capture the Governorship.

D

[Flubber]

I raised the question with googlie.

In previous duels I believe I explicitly prohibited governorship since it changes the game by making the infiltration dance largely irrelevant.

In my current duel I was suprised that the election was called and only then checked and saw that there was no rule on point for my existing game.

So in current duel , elections for governor should be allowed-- so chaos no need to abstain-- just vote on the general principle.

BUT in any future duels I will be looking for a rule that empath guild and governorship are out-- To me, a lot of the fun of a game is trying to gain or deny infiltration. In a 2x3, governorship means that all a player's oppopnents have infiltration on ALL their factions. Its a lot harder and challenging ( and more fun in my opinion)to have to individually infiltrate 3 different opponents factions.

Its also a gameplay thing--With no AI and only 2 competing blocs, it makes LAL almost overwhelmingly strong in a 2x3 duel since LAL should win the governship with the votes advantage. My current game shows this-- I have the greater overall population but cannot compensate for the Lal factional bonus.

[Chaos Theory]

You have the greater population, but if you had destroyed several PK bases, you would have had the edge in votes. It's key that my PK population is robust and my CyCon population is low, rather than the other way around.

For what it's worth, I didn't pick Lal for the votes, I picked him for the early-game advantage of extra talents, and the mid to late-game advantage of larger cities, as well as the lack of significant penalties.

I was itching for a way to call the council, since I realized that declaring vendetta on an opponent not only gets you vendettas from all their pactmates, but also gets you their comm frequencies. I was a little annoyed when you got all my frequencies in this way, but I've had the votes edge most if not all of the game.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Chaos Theory
You have the greater population, but if you had destroyed several PK bases, you would have had the edge in votes. It's key that my PK population is robust and my CyCon population is low, rather than the other way around.
.

Its tough to choose who you destroy in a game in the 2130s. Geography meant that finding and getting to Lal was more difficult than the route the the cycons. Obviously it means more to kill Pks than cycons, but you play the game you are faced with

[Chaos Theory]

I'm not suggesting that you had a choice in the matter this time, merely that Lal's votes can be compensated for, especially once you do have the choice.

[Chaos Theory]

This issue in 2x3 games got me thinking about related issues:

What about supreme victory? It's much harder than the governorship, but should be much easier in a 2x3 than in a normal game. Of course, by that point you've probably won anyway...

What about all the normal council proposals? If one player is fortunate enough to eliminate an opposing faction, he could pass anything (with the appropriate tech), such as repealing atrocities or raising the sea, allowing him to press the advantage. Is this a well-deserved benefit or an unbalancing side effect?

[Flubber]

hmmm -- I never had a problem with the others since as you state, you have to eliminate an opposing faction to get the advantage-- that is hard to do since an opponent can flood resources into their survival and even hide a new base within its better protected factions.

I have never seen an actual election as supreme leader in a Pbem. As you say, the advantage to get it would likely mean the others would resign anyway. But in a LAL with the Empath guild situation, it could be possible without a clear superiority. I always wondered how the right to repudiate the election would work since ALL the factions hating you would only mean your opponent's factions since there are no AI

[Chaunk]

I believe only the player immediatly following the newly elected supreme leader gets the chance to defy the council. If they say no, the game is over.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Chaunk
I believe only the player immediatly following the newly elected supreme leader gets the chance to defy the council. If they say no, the game is over.

well in a duel the next PLAYER is me but the next faction might be mine or might be his since we each play our 3 factions consecutively so the game mechanic would work diffefrently depending on which of his factions made the supreme leader attempt

[Hercules]

I would go with a version of Googlies option ,whereby the PG election is not allowed to be called until after an agreed date, say 2200 or 2220.

By then the player with the PK faction has had the chance of obtaining normal infiltration anyway so the benefit of Governship is more economic and ok some veto votes.