Let's Study Games - Final Tribal Council

[zoraster]

I've tended to gravitate to F3s in the past, but in truth I think both F2 and F3 are similar in how good they are for games IF players know what's coming or at least (such as RPG) know the process by which F2/3 is selected so they can plan their strategy around it.

---
I'm not sure how we got to the social strategic structural thing but I'm on the side that considers it a bad idea for a mod to do. I like when players come up with their own internal standards and rubrics. It's neat when Haschel questions me in FTC about it as a player, but imagine he were in a game that had different mod-given categories (say Loyalty, Big Moves, and Challenges) and then Haschel is going to have to swim upstream to get to how he wants to look at the game.

It's also probably bad for the site as a whole because it sorta enforces certain types of game styles that can fit into those little boxes. Fortunately I think Survivor as a base game overcomes that because players are generally going to vote for who they want anyway, but it's worth considering.

[zoraster]

I wouldn't be opposed to there being reward items which tell someone if it's an F2 or F3 if it isn't going to be announced the whole game. It could be a cool advantage.

Definitely a cool idea. Actually, a game where reward challenges gave more and more information about the game's structure would kind of be an interesting game.

[zoraster]

What are the benefits of giving each Juror a thread at FTC vs giving each finalist a thread vs having all of FTC in one thread? Assuming that we don't want to divide Social/Strategic/Structural (or along any other lines), which do we find most useful?

As a finalist, I like having my own thread I think, but as a Juror, I also like having my own thread. But I could see how having separate threads for each Juror could make it harder for some people to follow what is happening.

I like having all the FTC in one thread if I'm honest. I like that players can respond to each other in a more organic way, and I think it makes it MUCH more likely that at least part of people's responses to other jurors gets read.

[zoraster]

Yeah but I think one of the things that differentiate our games (not always but often) is that our games allow some asynchronous play over a long time period. You generally want to be able to be around before vote deadline is over, but even if you're not you can manage okay. You don't generally have to do challenges. Etc.

Live TCs and Live FTCs would be great (KYE had some fun pseudo-live TCs that could have been fun as real live ones), but I think it may be harder for our general population to justify signing up for a lot of games that require them be on at certain times. That stands in contrast to a lot of ORGs out there that really can't be competed in without essentially being on for hours to live video chat every night.

So maybe you could try to get FTC to be more live, but it's a lot to ask 7-10 jurors and 2-3 finalists to all be on at the same time.

Instead maybe you could do pseudo-live: organize a time that all finalists can be on. Everyone does an opening statement and every juror then gets a chance to make a post with questions, etc. All those are posted at the same time at the start of a "Live" FTC where there's maybe 3 hours to ask follow up questions and such. That still would take quite a bit of time (opening statement then question deadline then ftc) but it would keep it from beinga 24-72 hour slog through having to deal with back and forth questions and such.