For you bullies did't let me take part in the sandboxing...

...i'd drop my 2 cents here anyway. could you try sandboxing with 8dice max and 16,8 or none reserve dice slots?
I might do the trick about enforcing strategy without having to mess with the game balance.

However I'm convinced that i should be granted acces to the sandbox.

Please get rid of the min rating tables on sandbox.

Its already difficult enough to get 7 players without them spreading up on 1800+, or 2000+ servers, because I guess they don't know there is no score outcome on this servers.

hi. ryan you asked which version would be more fun for somebody who starts new. the 8 or 16 version. for me the 8dice game is a lot more fun.....

Mister M, that ain't an answer to question you cited.

Hi, well from evidence i can the games are roughly equal even long than 8 dice. 35-50 rounds.

I had just a game with 2 players having the board half / half. 16v16. and it was really a boring endgame then ever.

I think I like 8 stacks better, by the way. Anyway, when I suggested tinkering with the probablities for 16-stacks, tech said: "Why? Just one -good- reason for changing the probabilities?"

The reason I think it's a good idea is that the more dice everyone gets, the smaller an advantage becomes. This reduces the effect of strategy. Tinkering to make it roughly even: if you have x more dice you have x more advantage would mean that an advantage gained wouldn't slip away as stacks get bigger.

No, that's the point. What's there to make even? 3-dice advantage isn't always the same, that's how it works. And what's more, it's the same for everyone. What's to even out? I'd rather we didn't forego reality to simplify things to a remedial level...

How about following game setup. 7 players, 3 "fortune-gods". Whenever the players "throw dice", the god commitee decides how the dice should go to be fair. Fortune-God majority counts.

Only if I(or someone I can bribe easily)'m a fortune god.

I love it! It's so much fun!