Team Echo won a best 3 of 5 against team Delta. Team Echo will now play team Foxtrot in a best 3 of 5.

17 reds, 16 blues, 15 neutrals and 2 assassin words.

Note: Rule Change: There are two assassin words: If an assassin word is chosen, the opposing spymaster gets to flip an unrevealed word of their choice. If the same team chooses both assassin words, they lose the game.

NEW RULE . For these long-list games each team is permitted to pick up to 2 extra words each turn (instead of the normal 1 extra word). For example, if you get a clue of Monkey 2 you can pick up to 4 words. Monkey Unlimited, of course, would still allow you to pick until you are wrong (or you want to stop)

To ensure colour/going first balance, spymasters will rand for colour for game 1. Colours then flip for game 2. Rand again for game 3. Colours then flip for game 4. Game 5 will be a rand.

Teams are free to declare their spymaster for each game, but no person can spymaster more than once.

The teams are:

Team Echo (Champions!!!)
e_holle
Carl_Spackler
rtspurs
ArcticKnight
eyebooger

Team Foxtrot
JMurder3
pwnsall
nails
xander biscuits
bolt2112

zmog

NOTE: We need to discuss and agree upon two board balance options.

1. As posted in the OP.

17 reds, 16 blues, 15 neutrals and 2 assassin words.

or

2. 17 red, 17 blue, 14 neutral and 2 assassin words.

The spymaster who wins the rand (after reviewing the boards) gets to pick red or blue (but has to go last). Or, if he/she feels the boards are balanced, he/she can elect to go first and have the other spymaster pick red or blue.

Maybe people can indicate their preference for balance... 1 or 2?

I like option 1. Option 2 seems like it could be too powerful.

perhaps not as many guesses as you want, but perhaps more than 1 extra than the clue number. Perhaps 2 extra or 3 extra? Keep the unlimited clue in play.

You guys have played this and I've only railed though, so you'd know best. Just my 2 cents.

I proposed option 2, but I agree that maybe it overcompensates. I do like the idea that in any codenames variant, if a spymaster thinks there is a significant discrepancy between the difficulties of the colours, then the lists should be reranded.

Carl can probably speak to this better than me, as it was his suggestion, but these long-list games are full of make-up words. This will help address that and I don't believe having no limit on how many you pick will be a problem. If a team goes too far, it will get burnt.

Where it will really help in what is a tough job as spymaster is when you have 3 missing words you can clue Time 2 (for example) and your team will know you want two time words. Before it would be Time Unlimited and the team does not know how many are time words and how many are make-up words.

I know what you are saying, but if you and I are opposing spymasters you might argue that the board is so imbalanced it needs to be re-randed and I might argue it is a reasonable edge which is exactly what the intent was - to give me an edge. It then becomes a subjective debate. Under option 1 there is no debating the degree of imbalance, thus no hard feelings.

I think the occasional random inbalanced board is just life.. it is going to happen

How about this:

Suppose a team has successfully discovered w words, from clues "XXXX - x" and "YYYY - y". If the next clue is "ZZZZ - z", then they may make at least z+1 guesses, and at most the larger of z+1 and x+y+z-w. With x, y being 0 for 0 or unlimited.

I think the new mechanic will 1. Make the game easier and 2. Speed it up. Both of which are needed, imo

I have no opinion about the rules. I'm just here to chew gum and avoid assassins.

Yeah, idc. Whatever you guys want to do.

I guess that I am trying to say, you can keep guessing while in make-up.

True, imbalances should balance out.

The delegate from the city of Edmonton supports the rules as proposed in the opening post.

Like option 1. Still like the unlimited clues. How about 1 extra guess as normal, except for one round (determined by guessers)?

By the way - dibs out as spymaster to start.

Just my opinion but there is enough to think about in long-list. I'd rather scrap it or keep it. I think putting conditions/exceptions on it will just become confusing.

In the standard game, the unlimited thing is a cool mechanic, and I don't mind it.

4 unlimited / unnumbered clues in a row is a little much, though. I realize round 4 was a bit of an outlier, but that game became a real slog at some point.

I'm all for playing this series, but tbh I find the prospect of playing another 5 long games a bit daunting. The new mechanic would help.

I'm not married to it. If people aren't up for it, I'll play under any reasonable rules.

+2 instead of the normal +1 is a decent compromise.

I can spymaster for team Echo first if that is Ok, but am in no rush to start the game.

How about I rand a board tomorrow and send it to whoever team Foxtrot decides is their 1st spymaster. We can then rand for red/blue and start Friday. It may g slow over the long weekend, but that is fine....

By Friday we should know whether people want some conditions on the rule in question (picking until you miss if you want)

balance board options -- prefer 1 over 2
unlimited vs. +1 -- no preference

+2 instead of +1 seems like a good compromise, as Carl suggests.

I will send a note to JM3 and see if he can amend the OP to read.

NEW RULE . For these long-list games each team is permitted to pick up to 2 extra words each turn (instead of the normal 1 extra word). For example, if you get a clue of Monkey 2 you can pick up to 4 words. Monkey Unlimited, of course, would still allow you to pick until you are wrong (or you want to stop)

is this where the game will be?

I like just randing everything and never picking a board or color

Yeah, in fact I think we should have the whole series here. No need for new threads each game imo