insent to your yahoo address

Thanks!

One thing I was thinking of for choosing characters was using our survey software here to pick characters rather than doing it in turn order, i.e., people would choose a 1st and 2nd (maybe 3rd?) choice of character and, as long as they spread over the necessary functions, we would be good to go.

And if someone isn't happy with what they get they could let me know anonymously and we could go back to doing it in turn order.

I just remember that since I went third I could only choose between Adama, Tigh, and Helo. And, since I really didn't want to be Admiral in my first online game, I went with Helo, which I was happy with, but would have liked more options.

One thing I was thinking of for choosing characters was using our survey software here to pick characters rather than doing it in turn order, i.e., people would choose a 1st and 2nd (maybe 3rd?) choice of character and, as long as they spread over the necessary functions, we would be good to go.

I'm good with trying something new. A couple of things to watch out for:

1. Where preferences across categories are fairly evenly spread, this methodology should work well. However, if there are persistent biases in a group for or against particular character types, it may be harder to come up with a good solution. On boardgamegeek, pilots are significantly less popular than the other two categories. Here it seems to be politicians - we've had three games in a row where Zarek was President, because he was the only pollie picked.

2. People often choose their character based not just on category, but also on what characters have previously been chosen - especially in the area of card mix. (For instance, if by the last player, no one yet draws any Blue, they may prefer a character that does so.) The group's aggregate card draw could be a relevant factor too.

And if someone isn't happy with what they get they could let me know anonymously and we could go back to doing it in turn order.

This I'm less keen on. Changing the procedure to address an unhappy player will quite likely mean that someone else will miss out (otherwise, it would've been possible to accommodate everyone in the first place). If we'd like to try a different character selection procedure, I'd prefer just to stick with it.

Well, we may have to go back to the original way anyway if everyone picks the same characters in the same order. But I really think that is unlikely to happen.

Here it seems to be politicians - we've had three games in a row where Zarek was President, because he was the only pollie picked.

This actually might solve that problem, as I would have happily been Roslin (or Apollo/Starbuck for that matter), but didn't have that option.

In any case, it's nothing to set up the survey (and two seconds to fill it out), so we can see how the choices end up. I'll be the only one seeing the results, so it's no big deal to at least try it this way and proceed normally if it ends up not making sense.

Well, we may have to go back to the original way anyway if everyone picks the same characters in the same order.

Heh. In that case, both methods should just come down to generating a random player ranking.

This actually might solve that problem, as I would have happily been Roslin (or Apollo/Starbuck for that matter), but didn't have that option.

It's not really a problem as long as choices are fairly evenly spread. The official methodology ensures that, so the new method isn't likely to improve on it. As I see it, it flips around the joint goals of individual choice and group viability. The official method favours the second goal where they conflict; the survey method favours the first.

What would you need to make that work? How many characters should we rank to get a comfortable result? (Preferential voting!)

I would think 3 choices should do it. I don't want to get too complicated. I would just like people to have a better chance of getting the character they prefer while still maintaining "group viability".

I'm wondering, for the folks at the bottom of the draw, sometimes choice is determined by type. Maybe pick one of each type, with order you want? Just an thought.

The point of doing it this way is that you don't worry about type. You just put in your top choices. If there's not a good mix between politics, pilots, etc., you might get your second choice, or maybe third, instead of your first, but you're not restricted by type.

what if they pick all pilots?

what if they pick all pilots?

That would be a problem, because there are only two "You Are A Cylon" cards in the loyalty deck.