15 vs 7 as someone rightly pointed out seems a bit unfair! Definately
not 2-1. 5-1 is fair 15-3, 10-2 or maybe 4.5-1! It is important to
err on the side of caution such that it is inconcievable for a
military victory to be gained.
The Ring arguement is good. Personally, I'd scrap the Ring (At least
for 1650 where there is NO LOTR justification for it rolling into the
Crack of Doom) as it is the saddo's means of victory (in one game the
random bunch of losers I ended up with were completely stuffed in
quick time by the good play of the other side. The most selfish,
unhelpful player luckily found the Ring but was fortunately stopped
by the Freeps. What sort of game/victory would it have been?) and a
transparent ploy by GSI to drag the game out. As it happens the game
rolls on long enough without it and sterile end games put people of
the game defeating GSI's original intent.
Assuming there is no clamour supporting my 'NO RING' call, how about
this- At 4 or 5-1 a ten turn warning is given. If the odds can be
reduced in that time the game continues, if not then the game ends
unless there is a majority vote to continue for another 10/15/25
turns (Hunting one player can be a game in itself. Very satisfying
when you get the so and so). The One Ring saddo's have 10 turns to
find and deposit the Ring before Sauron is dragged of in chains or
the last hope of Numenor is killed.
There is another problematic game end scenario which is the three on
three eternal battle in which neither side can eliminate the other.
Whilst five players should be able to hunt down one eventually, 3 vs
3 is a stalemate. How about on turn 50 or 75 and every 25 thereafter
a vote by all the remaining players as to whether continue or not.
Total each sides non individual VPs with 400 for eliminated positions
and a for 'shadow' neutrals to balance side numbers (13vs13 not
13vs12) with undeclared neutrals ignored at this point. If one side
has 25% more VPS then they win otherwise it is an honourable draw.
The individual winner is taken from ALL players without regard to
team victory.
I stopped playing Austerlitz because the games were artificially
extended by putting in certain standby players. I think that a clear
end or possibility of such is important to players enjoyment of the
game along with recognition of good play by team and individuals.
Cheers
Chris Courtiour