One other rule we didn't like in multiplayer: when two or more non-owners have dudes with equal influence at a deed, control of the deed goes to the owner, even if the owner is not part of the tie.
Consider this situation:
- Deed X is owned by player A and has no dudes at it.
- Player B sends over a dude with 1 Influence. Player B now controls it.
- Player C sends over a dude with 1 Influence. Both Players B and C have equal Influence, and control goes to Player A, despite them having no dudes there.
That is very counter-intuitive. Thematically, it seems that if one set of opposing dudes takes over a mine, then the owner gets no production because the miners are held at gunpoint. But if two sets of opposing dudes take over the mine, then the miners happily work while the two groups are staring each other down. That just seems wrong.
Our suggested fix is as follows:
- If the owner is part of a tie in Influence, then the owner control the deed
- This would include a situation where the owner has no dudes and two opposing players have dudes that total 0 Influence, since all three players have 0 Influence at that deed.
- If the owner is not part of a tie in Influence, then nobody controls the deed.
Thematically, this makes more sense. If there are a bunch of hostile dudes at the mine, then no work gets done unless there are equal amounts of friendly dudes there to hold things off.
I'm not aware of any issues that would result from deeds not having a controller, but that would be something to watch out for.