Good Cause Simulator: BARiTONES (saturday)

[idolpro]

[ You’re in a sleek room full of all kinds of sci-fi dials and knobs. You feel like you’ve been here a long time with these people around you, and that you have a lot longer to go before this is all over.

You can hear the distant sounds of the station creaking due to shockwaves from the fighting outside. What is going on in this galaxy? Well, it’s not very important to you. What’s important is surviving.

You have a job to do. ]

Comments

Re: DISCUSSION

[crossmyfingers]

What, running?

Re: DISCUSSION

[mourningson]

What else?

Re: DISCUSSION

[crossmyfingers]

Hell no, we're doin' what we want!

Re: DISCUSSION

[mourningson]

Whatever that is. We do need to try and win this game.

Re: DISCUSSION

[crossmyfingers]

Highest Point Total, Second Highest Point Total, Least Injured, Most Harm Caused, Audience choice.

There are options.

Re: DISCUSSION

[mourningson]

...at this point I'm unable to identify which is most likely within our grasp.

Re: DISCUSSION

[crossmyfingers]

Our sustainability is pretty good and we haven't paid a dime in taxes so if we keep refusing, we could theoretically do well there but it's hard to tell what other teams are doing. There's a literal unit dedicated to rebellion so I doubt they'd pay either. Without being able to see where the other units stand, relying on a points game is a gamble.

Based on the fact that we cannot control the scenarios nor can we really stop the injuries aimed at us, considering we also shot a laser beam that units can't stop, relying on the least injured win is perhaps even more of a volatile win to rely on. Most harmed cause isn't bad since one of the stats is literally "sustainability". Even our weapon is meant to target sustainability. Again, it's impossible to know how well we're doing in comparison to everyone else, but it's probably the easiest to gauge.

And then audience choice is obviously the one we have most control in, and I'd assume it's to reward those who do something amazing, but we don't know our audience and what their criteria is yet. At least, I don't.

Re: DISCUSSION

[mourningson]

Hm.