Forum
Have some smaller tables with less players for a quick game. Less points at stake.
popcornbc wrote
at 8:53 PM, Saturday December 16, 2006 EST |
0 people think this is a good idea
slgalt wrote
at 3:15 PM, Friday December 1, 2006 EST 5 person game works well on the original.
|
Zoos wrote
at 11:01 AM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST This is a bad idea. Its good the way it is.
|
Ryan wrote
at 11:38 AM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST ok, I might have a button to start the game after 5 people if everyone agrees
|
Nesadi wrote
at 7:40 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST Have the game start after 60, 90, or 120 seconds after the last one ends as long as there are 3 or more players.
|
Nesadi wrote
at 7:42 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST Have the next game start 100 seconds after the last one ends as long as there are three or more players.
|
mcherm wrote
at 8:37 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST I'd rather have all human players... perhaps instead allow fewer than 7 players to start with (if all sitting players agree). Each player could enter a min num of players they want (defaults to 7) and if EVERYONE's min has been met then the game begins.
|
mcherm wrote
at 8:38 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST Instead, how about letting each player enter the min number of players they're willing to play with (defaults to 7). If all player's minimums have been met then the game begins. This allows folks to wait for 7 if they want to, but allows the game to go on if there aren't many people around.
|
richjkl wrote
at 11:38 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST Or maybe it should be defined by the table. When you create a table, it lets you pick how many people you want to play with.
|
joeTaco wrote
at 11:54 PM, Saturday December 2, 2006 EST I agree with mcherm AND richjkl... each player should be able to set their minimums, and the table setter-upper should be able to set the maximum.
|
Morwen wrote
at 2:36 AM, Sunday December 3, 2006 EST Some people might just want to watch, though.
|