tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post5010954792750448910..comments2023-12-03T23:16:56.786-07:00Comments on Cumbersome: 10/11/08 playtest: 8/7 Central and Invasion of TrishulaSeth Jaffeehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-21651753049103703942008-10-18T12:35:00.000-07:002008-10-18T12:35:00.000-07:00Rare may be a relative term. Some games feature th...Rare may be a relative term. Some games feature this Kingmaking aspect, some don't - and among those that do some are more prominent than others. Vinci has been used as an example of a game that often comes down to a kingmaker situation at the end. I like Vinci though, and I think the kingmaking doesn't bother me as much in that game because it only happens sometimes... maybe it seems less prominent to me.<BR/><BR/>If it is a kingmaker situation, then after a point it definitely is arbitrary. There's no advantage to be gained (that matters) positionally or score-wise if the game is over. Posture were the game to continue is completely meaningless when the game is not going to continue. <BR/><BR/>What you end up with is a whole other discussion about whether it's appropriate to "play for placement" or not. Some players will do what they can to maximize their score, irrespective of finishing order. Others, once out of contention for the win, will play for 2nd place. Others still, once out of contention, will count the game over and not try to improve their position at all.<BR/><BR/>This is a topic for another post, and perhaps I'll write something up and solicit opinions on that separately. Playing for Placement is a distinct phenomenon to Kingmaking, but I think they're related as the Kingmaker's decision is informed by that player's opinion of playing for Placement. And as you suggest, if I know a particular player will make a Kingmaker decision based on the fact that they will play for 2nd place, I can use that to my advantage - it's another question whether that counts as 'arbitrary' or not.Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-106209040693088852008-10-18T12:15:00.000-07:002008-10-18T12:15:00.000-07:00I find it rare that such a seemingly arbitrary pos...I find it rare that such a seemingly arbitrary position is in fact arbitrary, that there are no advantages accrued, positionally, score-wise, or even in posture were the game to continue. As such there is some weighting of the decision and thus a value that can be setup and manipulated by the players. For the cases it is in fact arbitrary I agree, yes, it isn't ideal.<BR/><BR/>Confucius is particularly delightful in this regard. The entire game is about setting up tied situations which resolve in your favour in just this sort of incidental manner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-7326982909758306362008-10-18T04:16:00.000-07:002008-10-18T04:16:00.000-07:00JC: Yeah, I'm familiar with your affinity and affe...JC: Yeah, I'm familiar with your affinity and affection for that pattern in games (primary way to advance your position is to help someone else). However, I don't think that's the same as Kingmaking.<BR/><BR/>I see Kingmaking - at least the bad kind - as a decision which <I>doesn't</I> help your position, you just have to pick a winner arbitrarily between other players.<BR/><BR/>As I think I mentioned previously, that's fine in a game that's about politicking, but not otherwise. I hate being in the position of having to arbitrarily choose the winner of a game.Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-83437894087810886012008-10-17T19:27:00.000-07:002008-10-17T19:27:00.000-07:00As the term is often used I look for and even seek...As the term is often used I look for and even seek out games which encourage kingmaking situations. Specifically I look for games in which players are often maneuvered into the position where the primary way to better their own position is to also make someone else win. I have a particular liking for that pattern, whether or not I'm the one maneuvering or being maneuvered or watching another in that position.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-11213704384513769242008-10-16T10:21:00.000-07:002008-10-16T10:21:00.000-07:00I generally agree - I hate Kingmaking.What *should...I generally agree - I hate Kingmaking.<BR/><BR/>What *should* be occurring on the final turn, however, is that the Trishulans are so concerned with getting every last unit into the temple that they can, that they're not even considering screwing each other over. It's a failure on the part of the Invader (and my "balancing" of them) when the situation exists otherwise.<BR/><BR/>All other points issues should be primarily resolved much earlier on. And, hopefully, it will become very clear in future session that the Invaders are the *primary* enemy.<BR/><BR/>But if it's the final turn, and the species I'm weak against has been hounding me for the whole game while the Invaders haven't touched me, I just might be more likely to go in favor of the Invaders. <BR/><BR/>With further playtesting, this issue will hopefully be mitigated to some extent. But do know that I share your concerns.etothepihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07291390886662781929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-26569647362825002442008-10-16T09:37:00.000-07:002008-10-16T09:37:00.000-07:00So what you're saying is that you don't mind the K...So what you're saying is that you don't mind the Kingmaking aspect. In your example, the choice of you playing Kingmaker between me and Anna had some basis - I was 'all up in your business' all game, certainly. Anna wasn't (she was busy being all up in MY business!). So it follows that you might have been justified in making sure she won instead of me (if you'd decided you were not going to win).<BR/><BR/>But that wasn't really the issue in our last game. The real kingmaing issue was Rif's situation. He couldn't win, but he could ensure that (a) I won, or (b) you won. In fact, he also could have ensured that (c) Anna won if he'd wanted to. That last turn for example, when he chose to either let your 11 guys into the temple, or fight you, is the perfect example. Either way, he ends up solidly in 3rd place. If he lets you in, you win. If he doesn't, I win. He has no real basis or reason to pick one over the other. No one picked on him all game (if anything, you did more than I did). He went with the reasoning "I'll do what nets me more points" (which is really arbitrary) and let you in the temple.<BR/><BR/>If Anna hadn't blown her wad attacking the temple early (and it's probably evident that she shouldn't have done that if she wanted any chance of winning at that point), Rif could have ensured she won as well, by entering the temple and attacking whoever he could. In no case could Rif advance his position, and his choice is fairly arbitrary as to who wins the game.<BR/><BR/>Some games are just like that, and maybe it's good to stay on everyone's good side, so that if you're in contention for the lead someone will make you king. I just don't want to be the person faced with that decision - and I'm not the only one.Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-5650786628841130452008-10-15T19:04:00.000-07:002008-10-15T19:04:00.000-07:00I've given it some more thought - I'm not sure the...I've given it some more thought - I'm not sure the Kingmaking is too big of a deal, actually.<BR/><BR/>You were up in my business the entire game. Anna was not. Given the possibility of destroying you, and possibly still losing, versus keeping the peace, I'm not actually sure what I would've done. But after your relentless pursuit of my resource spaces (while, again, Anna had not done so), I could see a justification.<BR/><BR/>The simple answer is that the Invader should be hounding all players to a greater extent - getting them more pissed off at the Invader, and any kingmaking situation going to them. As for internal Kingmaking, I would believe that most players will wind up doing so in favor of their weaker players and against their stronger players - something the stronger players should account for when interacting with their weaker counterparts. I might increase the benefits on this to enhance this choice in the future, but only when convinced that kingmaking is a problem.etothepihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07291390886662781929noreply@blogger.com