I'm not sure where to put this - if one of the admins wants to move it to an appropriate place, that'd be great.
I have had an idea for a couple months of having a long-running game, which will consist of two parts. First part is that one of the players will propose a kingdom of 10 cards (or eleven with a bane), which he hopes is not very easy to figure out in terms of the optimal strategy. Then other players (can't be the proposer) try to figure out what the optimal way to play *is*. Bonus points to proposer for tactical complexity, for needing to be reactionary to the opponent, for having different *types* of deck be viable, and most of all for having more strategies than 2 that appear viable. But basically the proposer gets points for the longer it takes to solve the kingdom, and the solvers get points the quicker they're able to do it.
If we're actually going to try to keep track of some running score, we'd need some particular point values for things, time limits, etc. But I figure we'd probably just be doing this for the fun of it, and possibly to try to figure out what kind of sets make for interesting ones, getting better as players, etc. etc. etc.
Anyway, the idea would be that once one set is done, by some consensus being established, we'd move on to the next person to get a chance to solve it. Oh, and we should give the proposer a chance to 'defend' his set by showing that the apparent consensus is wrong. And we'd be looking for evidence here of some sort - usually this is going to mean test games, which probably means you'll need collaboration between multiple solvers. Well, these are all details that can be worked out.
Let me know what you guys think, if you're interested, what ideas you have, etc.