Kerim Aydin wrote: > Result: strategy, more cards can be defined with probabilities a mix of > choice and random. > > What do you think, worth the complication with it getting as cross-matrixed > as notes but associated with specialties? A better way to do committees? > Yes/no/maybe?
Interesting. I like the idea; I would vote for it, over your previous proto even. I wonder if this can be taken even farther, to the point of MtG-style deckbuilding. The three main issues with that, I think, would be (1) much complexity for new players in relation to basic things like voting; (2) keeping track of individual cards, as you noted earlier was a problem last time; and (3) balancing card powers in the face of greater individual control over their frequency. (2) should actually be fairly easy to deal with; just have per-deck probabilities. (3)... maybe cards can be coerced into a few discrete rarities (common, uncommon, rare) with each rarity having a maximum per-card (and/or total per-rarity) probability in any given deck. (Like the MtG rule about four copies of a card in a deck, or one copy for certain "restricted" cards.) (1) may be intractable.
