Re: [pbmserv] Early Psycho thoughts

[Mark Ballinger <mballinger@ballinger.cx>]

On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 05:05:00AM -0800, Eric wrote:
> Is this complicated rock-paper-scissors? It starts
> with someone able to win on the first turn by guessing
> a row/column that other people ignored.

That's how I got my one win!

> Then there's always one (maybe two) people who build up 
> strength, but even they can be beaten if someone slips 
> in a quick row somewhere else.

I haven't seen that.  I've only seen one of the two strong
players finally slip in a win.

> Looking at the standings, Jim is the only one who's
> managed a .500 record over the course of several
> games. Dzander and Sharkey have managed reasonable
> records in a multiplayer game.
> 
> But it just feels like throwing things around with
> zero control. What do others think?

I feel that between this game, conway and warship there's a real fun game waiting for us to discover it.  warship is the only one that I still play.

All three have a square board and more than two players, where players are throwing stuff at the board to win.  warship has fixed hidden targets and non-simultaneous 
play.  conway has evolving ownership spaces and non-simultaneous play.  I wish each had a way to work in simultaneous play.

psycho suffers from two problems.  Runaway leaders and strange rules (some recommended by me) that only exist to hinder cheap wins.

I don't yet know which of these elements would make up a totally fun game in this arena.  I just feel it's out there.