kingmaking

Attention over time

7-day rolling share of analyzed posts/comments mentioning this entity · 90 daily points ending 2026-08-02

Final complete day: 2026-08-02. Attention was 0.1% — this entity appeared in 11 of 9,589 analyzed posts/comments in the seven days ending that day (15 mentions).

Each point is a seven-day rolling window of complete UTC days; a point is comparable only when at least 100 analyzed posts or comments fall inside it. A day with no analyzed records counts as zero; missing coverage is marked and never shown as zero. The series ends at the latest complete analyzed day — it never extends into the current incomplete day. How attention is measured.

Recent mentions

1. 2026-07-30 16:00 UTCComment

   If before the game it's clear P2 will only play to make P1 win, yeah, that's kingmaking. if during the game an alliance is struck and the player decided to be play as a trustworthy ally even to their detriment then it's not kingmaking to me. I see the GoT as an extremely thematic game where holding grudges and respecting (or betraying) alliances makes sense. If you want people to always act out of their best interest just takes the game part out of it and becomes a collaborative puzzle which rare bits of randomness.

2. 2026-07-30 10:29 UTCComment

   This is exactly what I was trying to say as well, but I'm not good with words. I'd also like to add that those people who belong to this group that hate this type of game still often want to play them, but their expectations are at a totally different place. Many want games to be fair and balanced for all, but games like these just inherently are not, and that's what makes them controversial often resulting in unfair criticism. Like, I understand kingmaking being awful at games that *don't* have any use for it. I don't like, for example, someone throwing a game of Carcassonne and actively helping just one player by blocking others. But Game of Thrones and similar games? Bring it on.

3. 2026-07-30 08:41 UTCComment

   I believe this game has a fixing house rule that was probably accepted even by the authors that let Lannister having more starting ships in their port this way they can avoid being immediately outplayed. I can't remember the details as I don't play this game since long time, I had the feeling you can definitely win the game with kingmaking, but if every player play the game to win, an unexpected victory is very possible.

4. 2026-07-30 07:09 UTCComment

   If it's spiteful kingmaking then yes, it's kind of shitty. But kingmaking is just that, giving one player the keys to victory. These games are for a certain type of player. If you're easily annoyed by asymmetry and things being unbalanced, then I don't know what else to say than these are not the games for you however much you may want them to be. They are not fair, and forcing these games to be played balanced and fair takes a lot of their soul away. But yeah, if someone does these things out of spite (and even worse for reasons stemming from outside the game) or just throws the game early on, it's a bummer and maybe that group needs to have a talk about what's expected in their plays of these games.

5. 2026-07-30 06:55 UTCComment

   I find kingmaking absurd unless we have different definitions of it. I think when most people talk about it here, they mean intentionally making someone else win with that as the main reason and not because they help you too get a better score. I think you should always go for your best possible position to end in and ending a game quicker from last place by kingmaking just seems more like spite than playing. I would just stop inviting such a person to games like GoT, Dune and so on. What is your definition of kingmaking?