technically while I’d totally despise it, it also still is just an evil king for all practical purposes. (because no one in the right mind would aid BD with an ability that makes them 3x more likely to be evil than neutral, and 100% impossible to be good).
The BD king still doesn’t have allies, so the allies meta wouldn’t resurface under this anyways.
I experienced starting neutral king.
Na. If you were telling the truth then you would be complaining about this suggestion
Boi, I started right around Priest getting axed. None of you have actually presented an argument, but have just expressed your own distaste for it or saying “can’t win with it”.
(just get gud)
I’m not the one saying you can’t win with it. Win-rates have nothing to do with my argument.
in how many games does the starting King survive?
This is no argument against a neutral king. This is an argument against a weak neutral king.
My guess is about 15%.
There are times when you guard yourself and you will die. No skill required, you’re dead.
Examples: enforcer, Reaper
If you buffed any role enough, of course it won’t die. But why should a neutral King have more survivability than other Kings?
You can make this argument for most roles. Die as a Princess N1, should have done something right…?
Because it has a more difficult win condition.
“Goal: survive”
Yeah sure buddy keep dreaming.
Not what I was saying. At all.
I was saying that even if you use guards strategically, there’s always that randomness of this game that gets you killed.
I don’t see that as an argument against neutral king. “Inherent randomness can possibly make you lose” is also not unique to neutral king.
If you buff it too much, it essentially becomes super- BD King
I’m just gonna mention that neut king is greater than BD king already in the OP since it has allies. Claim neut king and you’re gonna be asked your checks.
Or be accused of a fakeclaiming evil king. Claiming neutral doesn’t just have benefits.