If players can actually coordinate that without having someone else jump in, maybe they deserve a reward? Something else to think about as round 350 approaches...
Suddenly it struck me that letting people delete posts in Chain Gang might not be such a bad idea after all. Certainly it would save work for me and the other hosts.
If players can actually coordinate that without having someone else jump in, maybe they deserve a reward? Something else to think about as round 350 approaches...
If players can actually coordinate that without having someone else jump in, maybe they deserve a reward? Something else to think about as round 350 approaches...
avoran wrote:At this point here's what I'm thinking for CG prizes, starting from round 351:
+1 for each player from 1-10
+2 for each player from 11-20
+3 for each player from 21-25
+4 for each player from 26 up (and no limit on the number but cap the reward at 50)
subtract 2 for each individual skipped starting letter, except
subtract 5 for each time 2 starting letters in a row are skipped
I'm also thinking about borrowing an idea from Rush Hour and some other contests that might look something like this:
- if the current chain is longer than the previous chain, +2 for each extra name (max. +10)
- if the current chain is shorter than the previous chain, -2 for each name it falls short (max. -10)
What do you think?
I would like to see you use this part for the reward system:
+1 for each player from 1-10
+2 for each player from 11-20
+3 for each player from 21-25
+4 for each player from 26 up (and no limit on the number but cap the reward at 50)
and ignore everything else suggested after it.
I think simpler is better.
avoran wrote:Suddenly it struck me that letting people delete posts in Chain Gang might not be such a bad idea after all. Certainly it would save work for me and the other hosts.
I'm OK with the "no deleting posts" rule.
However, I would appreciate the penalty applied to all players equally.
Being "new" to the game is not an excuse for not reading the rules first.
melanthiabast wrote:I would like to see you use this part for the reward system:+1 for each player from 1-10
+2 for each player from 11-20
+3 for each player from 21-25
+4 for each player from 26 up (and no limit on the number but cap the reward at 50)
and ignore everything else suggested after it.
I think simpler is better.
That isn't going to happen with those numbers. It would be too easy to get a very large prize. But you definitely have a point about keeping things simple.
avoran wrote:That isn't going to happen with those numbers. It would be too easy to get a very large prize. But you definitely have a point about keeping things simple.
Perhaps try a variation then?
+1 for each player from 1-15
+2 for each player from 16-25
+3 for each player from 26 up (and no limit on the number of players in the chain - but cap the reward at 50 WRZ$)
Change that to 0 for the first 5 and I would seriously consider it.
(aside from making the the payouts slightly smaller, that saves me some work if a chain crashes early )
I am still reluctant to give up the negatives for skipping letters, though. I would really like to find a way to discourage people from doing that.
One idea I had was to say +1 for every person, but +2 if it's the second person with the same starting letter, +3 if it's the third person and so on. I really like that idea except for one thing: it's an even stronger incentive to cheat. And that's the last thing we need when the site doesn't enforce rules about duplicate accounts.
(aside from making the the payouts slightly smaller, that saves me some work if a chain crashes early
)I am still reluctant to give up the negatives for skipping letters, though. I would really like to find a way to discourage people from doing that.
One idea I had was to say +1 for every person, but +2 if it's the second person with the same starting letter, +3 if it's the third person and so on. I really like that idea except for one thing: it's an even stronger incentive to cheat. And that's the last thing we need when the site doesn't enforce rules about duplicate accounts.
avoran wrote:Change that to 0 for the first 5 and I would seriously consider it.
(aside from making the the payouts slightly smaller, that saves me some work if a chain crashes early
I do like the idea that even if you wind up in a short chain, you should get *something* for your effort.
I can also see your point about not wanting to pay out on the less then 5 in a chain though.
Perhaps when the chain reaches 5 you can start with a reward of 5 WRZ$ - then go to the +1 after that, so the 6th person is 6 WRZ$, etc.
avoran wrote:I am still reluctant to give up the negatives for skipping letters, though. I would really like to find a way to discourage people from doing that.
If you will penalize ONLY the person who skipped the letters and not everyone in the chain - I can agree with that.
To discourage players from skipping letter, reduce the reward the ones who skipped get - then when you do the payout, let them know that their reward is less and why it was reduced.
If they are playing the game to earn WRZ$, that will let them know that teamwork is a more effective way to get more WRZ$ then posting quickly and potentially skipping others.
Perhaps there should be a time limit as to what is considered skipping as well?
For example, if I have waited an hour and no letter in between me and the last poster has posted, then it's not considered "skipping" after an hour has passed.
avoran wrote:One idea I had was to say +1 for every person, but +2 if it's the second person with the same starting letter, +3 if it's the third person and so on. I really like that idea except for one thing: it's an even stronger incentive to cheat. And that's the last thing we need when the site doesn't enforce rules about duplicate accounts.
:nods: That would be my reluctance as well.
I'm all for the +1 WRZ$ per person in the chain, both because it's direct and simple, and it also means that players aren't going to get "bonuses" for certain letters, multiples, etc.
melanthiabast wrote:If you will penalize ONLY the person who skipped the letters and not everyone in the chain - I can agree with that.
The problem with that is that there is a big difference between skipping, say, the M's and skipping the Z's. If we treat both cases equally that's unfair to the first A who posts.
If there was a way to allow people who had been skipped to post and somehow be included, then it would be fair: the M's probably would be around to do so and the Z's probably wouldn't. But I'm not sure how to do that without making things complicated again.
The best I can come up with is this:
If you've been skipped and post within (say) 5 minutes of the person who skipped you, then you're in and he's out.
In theory I like it. But in practice it would get confusing as people tried to work out who the "real" last poster was. We could try to get around that by saying you could only "claim a skip" if the moderator (me) was around to confirm it and make an appropriate post with the updated chain, but that would also be unfair because obviously I can't be here all the time. It just gets too messy.
Maybe somebody else has a better idea?
A radical idea: what if to play CG you have to sign up first, like for Please Reply?
So the potential chain is the alphabetical list of people who have signed up.
advantages:
1. If someone who has no idea what's going on posts, that won't break the chain - their post can just be ignored. In fact I'm not sure there would even be such as thing as a "broken chain" in this version...
2. Everybody can see the list of eligible posters, and there would be a rule that you're not ALLOWED to skip a name before a certain amount of time (say, 15 minutes per name).
disadvantages:
1. It's a lot less flexible.
2. Forcing people to sign up first means less people will end up playing.
That would be a major change to the way CG works, and I'm not sure how best to structure the rewards in this case. Also, the entire emphasis shifts from "help build the chain" to "try to be around when it's your turn". I can't say I really like that. It looks like a case of the cure being worse than the disease. But I thought I'd throw the idea out there just in case...
So the potential chain is the alphabetical list of people who have signed up.
advantages:
1. If someone who has no idea what's going on posts, that won't break the chain - their post can just be ignored. In fact I'm not sure there would even be such as thing as a "broken chain" in this version...
2. Everybody can see the list of eligible posters, and there would be a rule that you're not ALLOWED to skip a name before a certain amount of time (say, 15 minutes per name).
disadvantages:
1. It's a lot less flexible.
2. Forcing people to sign up first means less people will end up playing.
That would be a major change to the way CG works, and I'm not sure how best to structure the rewards in this case. Also, the entire emphasis shifts from "help build the chain" to "try to be around when it's your turn". I can't say I really like that. It looks like a case of the cure being worse than the disease. But I thought I'd throw the idea out there just in case...
avoran wrote:The best I can come up with is this:
If you've been skipped and post within (say) 5 minutes of the person who skipped you, then you're in and he's out.
In theory I like it. But in practice it would get confusing as people tried to work out who the "real" last poster was. We could try to get around that by saying you could only "claim a skip" if the moderator (me) was around to confirm it and make an appropriate post with the updated chain, but that would also be unfair because obviously I can't be here all the time. It just gets too messy.
That would make me more reluctant to post in a chain.
Even if I check "who's online" first before I post - some people (like myself) show offline all the time but are still around fairly often, and it also means that by posting I am *counting* on no one near me in the alphabet showing up within 5 minutes of my post.
If I get skipped while I'm PM'ing people, waiting for replies, and checking who's online - I am now in the position of bumping someone else out if I join the chain.
avoran wrote:Maybe somebody else has a better idea?
The simplest way to include more people with less skipping is to expand upon what you are already doing.
There is currently a CG rule where if posts are out of order alphabetically BUT made within the same minute, the chain is considered unbroken.
Consider expanding this to 5 minutes, but don't drop the people who posted and skipped others out of the chain.
melanthiabast wrote:Consider expanding this to 5 minutes, but don't drop the people who posted and skipped others out of the chain.
Now that is a great idea!
It does mean that people will have to keep an eye on posts before the last one, but I think it's definitely worth a try. No need to do anything radical with the pay-outs. Yes!
avoran wrote:Now that is a great idea!melanthiabast wrote:Consider expanding this to 5 minutes, but don't drop the people who posted and skipped others out of the chain.
It does mean that people will have to keep an eye on posts before the last one, but I think it's definitely worth a try. No need to do anything radical with the pay-outs. Yes!
Thank you avoran!
If you are considering adopting that change, I think it would be interesting to see how it works.
The only thing I would note is that if you are posting out of order - you should make and extra effort to update the whole chain in your post and not just post your name.
Could I butt in by saying that I didn't even know that these games existed when I joined but there are at least six members who's names start with "S". I really like the five minute rule especially that you tend to start these games right around "S" or "G".
Edit to say that this is regarding Chain Gang.
Edit to say that this is regarding Chain Gang.
Last edited by Semi-hex on Feb 24th, 2015, 3:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
So, here's the deal with the Volunteers thread.
Since you all are doing such a great job helping our mods, I've decided to offer an extra reward when we reach 1000 posts in the Volunteers thread. In order to be elegible, you need a post (thus a volunteer action) in the #900 to #1000 posts.
But here's the catch: the reward(s) will go to the "selfless" posters! I'll check every poster's history to see what's the WRZ$-to-post ratio, and give a prize to the lower three figures (I think Guy may add something too
)
Since you all are doing such a great job helping our mods, I've decided to offer an extra reward when we reach 1000 posts in the Volunteers thread. In order to be elegible, you need a post (thus a volunteer action) in the #900 to #1000 posts.
But here's the catch: the reward(s) will go to the "selfless" posters! I'll check every poster's history to see what's the WRZ$-to-post ratio, and give a prize to the lower three figures (I think Guy may add something too
)