by GreatDebate
ranapuer wrote:
Imagine a 4-player game in which three players use the OP's strategy and the fourth rolls only for points and energy and rerolls every attack die (possibly stopping after two die rolls to ensure no accidental attacks).
The three aggressive monsters are going to beat up on each other while the passive one takes the lead in points and health and can win either way from there.
Now imagine a 4-player game in which three players use the points-and-energy strategy and a fourth uses the OP's all-in attack strategy. The aggressive monster is going to be able to smash face harder than the rest of them, possibly staying within Tokyo to do it. The aggressive monster will likely be able to defeat the others before they can get the required amount of points.
Finding a way to adapt to your opponents' strategies and find other ones that beat them is almost a game-within-a-game. A metagame, if you will.
The three aggressive monsters are going to beat up on each other while the passive one takes the lead in points and health and can win either way from there.
Now imagine a 4-player game in which three players use the points-and-energy strategy and a fourth uses the OP's all-in attack strategy. The aggressive monster is going to be able to smash face harder than the rest of them, possibly staying within Tokyo to do it. The aggressive monster will likely be able to defeat the others before they can get the required amount of points.
Finding a way to adapt to your opponents' strategies and find other ones that beat them is almost a game-within-a-game. A metagame, if you will.
Yep.