From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Lots of questions...
Date: 28 Sep 92 14:43:21 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
Originator: gharris@jade.tufts.edu

In article <selYo2m00awOM7vbxy@andrew.cmu.edu> jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joseph E. Beck) writes:
>
>>The Pacifist isn't that bad. We even had a game where the Pacifist never had
>>a compromise card. If you think the Pacifist is too dangerous in a game, don't
>>ask them to be an ally when they would get a base out of it. That should
>>more than equalize things.
>
>The way we feel around here is that sorceror should be about as
>powerful as a combat power gets.  And pacifist thrashes sorceror (in
>general).  

	But Sorceror just isn't that powerful.  It's comparable to Gambler,
but not as powerful as Oracle.  Plus, just because Pacifist thrashes Sorceror
one on one doesn't mean Pacifist is more poweful *in general* than Sorceror.

>>Really not a problem. To be safe from losing bases when they make an
>>incorrect prediction, they need 3 tokens per base.
>It's usually not that difficult to tell who's going to win (certainly
>much better than 50%).

	Well, generally, but often a sure thing can be taken away, and if
you don't have that cushion on those occasions, you're screwed.

>>Magnet can neutralize them by forcing them along on attacks.
>So if Magnet or Silencer is in the game, prophetess can be stopped
>easily, otherwise she just wins the game.  If she guesses right 2/3 of
>the time (2/3 seems about right)  that's an average loss of 1 token
>for each external base.

	Yes, but long term average isn't useful in predicting performance.
She could still easily miss three in a row at the start, and then she's
in a horrible position.  Plus, if Loser's in the game, or any of a number
of powers, it becomes *very* difficult to predict wh will win.

>>>Sting
>>I don't know this one.
>It's kind of like zombie except you designate someone else to lose the
>tokens for you (I'm fairly certain they pick where from).  In return
>they get 1 card from your hand for each token lost (if you don't have
>enough cards they get as many as are in your hand).
>
>>>Pacifist (this is in the original but still reall gross)
>>Also pretty good, but a long way from unbeatable. You can run out of
>>compromises, people can out guess you and play a compromise when you do...
>So if they're lucky they get to make a deal.  Compare this power to
>empath...

	So what?  Empath is the worst power in the game...compare *anything*
to Empath.

>>>Machine (it gets really nasty in multi power games)
>>No problem as long as they don't have a decent attack power too, or
>>worse Wrack/Zombie...
>You only need Machine/Wrack to be almost unstoppable.  Put 1 token in
>the cone, and make the deal "base for a base".  If they accept, great.
>If they refuse put your token (and one of theirs) in the warp.  Take
>your next challenge, *remove a token of your from the warp*, and
>proceed.

	This is one of those power combinations that seems unbeatable in
theory, but there are probably lots of ways it could die in practice.
(cf. Seeker-Gambler).

>	joe
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          "She had ever chance for happiness, ever 
George W. Harris                chance in the world, and stomped ever one 
Dept. of Mathematics            of them chances down in the dirt like a 
Tufts University                bug."   _The Devil's Dream_
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce