@IvanBrett It would work numbers wise all the way to the final, ie with 6 players left just select one traitor. There could also be nice touches like the winning faithful could choose to reward previously killed prolific traitor hunters, so add some incentive to doing well early
@IvanBrett I’m adamant recruitment this late on in the traitors ruins the game- what chance do the faithful have? I wish to call for NO RECRUITMENT at all in the game. If the faithful catch all the traitors, split the money won, and start the game again with remaining players (new traitors)
@FPLFocal Okay so…. I captained Watkins yesterday and have most of the rest of that list in my team. Assumably I want the ones with under 100 to do well and the ones over to not do well, or is that wrong?
@IvanBrett@eurogamer You articulated my thoughts very well- the recruitment of new traitors makes it so hard. I’d also love to see some faithful on faithful battles at the end (with all traitors gone) surely some would start making ‘more money for me if we banish them’ calculations
@MattChorley Also to try and suggest that an employer who is not in dispute with its (unionised) workforce over pay is no better than one that is, is quite disingenuous!
@MattChorley The notion that any profession that is ‘reasonably well paid’ shouldn’t strike is ludicrous. If your pay award is below inflation you become poorer and your work is devalued. No highly paid government minister should try and undermine that