CORDIAL MINUET ENSEMBLE

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, as cool as the lightning bolt was about "hey, we could actually match two people up who are trying to play different stakes," I've become convinced that anything bordering on funny-money is a bad precedent to set here.  We're tracking balances down to the 100th of a penny here.  Money is hard and real in this game.  The person you're playing is always in for the same amount that you are.  I think it's important to keep it that way.

What you're suggesting is good:  that I would create a buffer pool to pad out "missing" winnings of some matches with the "extra" losings of other matches.  But it's still kind of funny.  Imagine if you matched your friend and talked about it later.  "Ha, I won $18 bucks from you!"  No, your friend would say, I only was in for $5"

I mean, on average, the pool would stay pretty even, with it all coming out in the wash.  It could even work this way always to help people of disparate stakes match up.  But it's just strange and non-transparent.

In order to guarantee that you're playing only penny games when you hold the amulet, you need to have  a sub-40-cent balance.  But how would you get the amulet in the first place with such a low balance?

Well, with 40 cents, you could join randomly-matched games with amulet holders who have up to $8.

Maybe 5% is too small.

Also, regarding the incentive to play low stakes games in hopes of being paired with an amulet holder, it depends on how we do the pairing.

If we randomly pick from the existing games that are below 5% of the amulet holder's balance, then yeah, proposing penny games would make you most likely to get picked (because EVERY amulet holder could play you).

But if we pick a random stake first for the amulet holder from their whole 5% range and THEN look at the existing games for a match, proposing only penny games won't work as well for non-amulet holders.

The most attractive stake then becomes 2.5% of the average bankroll in the game, whatever that is, because it's the value that's closest to the most values in the 5% range.

But yeah, maybe 10% would make it more interesting.

AnoHito

Member

Registered: 2014-11-24

Posts: 116

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Ano, if it worked that way, I'd be making assumptions about what amulet was "better" to you.  Maybe you have the best chance at the copper you are holding, but you just played a game against gold and won.  Should I assume you want to keep working on the copper, or that you'd rather drop it for the gold?

I'd really need to ask before making that kind of choice for you, but asking is messy.

If I never let you play another amulet holder while you hold an amulet, the question does not need to be asked.

Also, it seems kinda insular and weird for two amulet holders to play each other.  There are likely hundreds of other players who would like a shot at an amulet, and we're going to let two amulet holders hog each other?

True, and actually as an amulet holder I would rather play against players who didn't already have an amulet anyway, since I would assume that amulets would tend to gravitate into the hands of strong players.

Last edited by AnoHito (2015-03-07 04:56:18)

Dan_Dan84

Member

Registered: 2015-02-14

Posts: 106

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

In order to guarantee that you're playing only penny games when you hold the amulet, you need to have  a sub-40-cent balance.  But how would you get the amulet in the first place with such a low balance?

Well, with 40 cents, you could join randomly-matched games with amulet holders who have up to $8.

Maybe 5% is too small.

The most attractive stake then becomes 2.5% of the average bankroll in the game, whatever that is, because it's the value that's closest to the most values in the 5% range.

But yeah, maybe 10% would make it more interesting.

Hmm, the reason I liked the 5% figure was because it lined up with Asminthe's advice on bankroll management. That way, if I had the amulet, I could at least know that I was only playing for a certain amount. 10% could be a lot... I mean, I don't know how much some of the profit leaders on here have left in their accounts (versus what they've withdrawn), but if you have $200, you could be playing for $20 and not even know it!

But then again, having an amulet will be a really rare occurrence. And I suppose as long as the amulet holder has the clear option to play non-amulet games or "drop" their amulets in cheap stakes games, then that's not a problem. As I've been writing this, I now also think that 10% would make things more interesting...

Also re: collusion through penny games: I expect that a lot of new players will be playing penny games, so I suppose it's not that likely a colluder will be matched with his alt. However, an experienced player holding an amulet could beat up on newbies to rack up wins at that level... An experienced player would need an alt account with only a small balance to make that work, but that makes it unlikely they'll get the amulet again with that account once they drop it...

And of course, I'm sure you don't want everyone just playing penny games. That would make the tribute rather low.

joshwithguitar

Member

Registered: 2015-01-07

Posts: 128

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, as cool as the lightning bolt was about "hey, we could actually match two people up who are trying to play different stakes," I've become convinced that anything bordering on funny-money is a bad precedent to set here.  We're tracking balances down to the 100th of a penny here.  Money is hard and real in this game.  The person you're playing is always in for the same amount that you are.  I think it's important to keep it that way.

I personally think the system here is excusable in this case as it only affects a certain limited number of games as part of the competition. It is not something you will sustain, and so it is simply an additional prize pool in the competition. You of course would not sustain such a pool after the comp ends. Amulet games will already be strange and non-transparent anyway and I don't imagine players complaining about winning/losing money in exactly the way they expect to given the stakes of their game. Money remains hard and real - you are just betting against the pool rather than the other player.

What exactly do you mean by funny-money?

What you're suggesting is good:  that I would create a buffer pool to pad out "missing" winnings of some matches with the "extra" losings of other matches.  But it's still kind of funny.  Imagine if you matched your friend and talked about it later.  "Ha, I won $18 bucks from you!"  No, your friend would say, I only was in for $5"

If you met a friend after in this case, it wouldn't seem that strange because it was an amulet game and it is quite obvious from the amulet holders point of view that they were matched randomly and would not know what stakes they were playing.

In order to guarantee that you're playing only penny games when you hold the amulet, you need to have  a sub-40-cent balance.  But how would you get the amulet in the first place with such a low balance?

As long as you are also able to play non-amulet games it should be pretty easy to lower yourself down to 40c.
Also, you could cash-out down to 40c.

Also, regarding the incentive to play low stakes games in hopes of being paired with an amulet holder, it depends on how we do the pairing.

If we randomly pick from the existing games that are below 5% of the amulet holder's balance, then yeah, proposing penny games would make you most likely to get picked (because EVERY amulet holder could play you).

But if we pick a random stake first for the amulet holder from their whole 5% range and THEN look at the existing games for a match, proposing only penny games won't work as well for non-amulet holders.

The most attractive stake then becomes 2.5% of the average bankroll in the game, whatever that is, because it's the value that's closest to the most values in the 5% range.

So you're proposing that a value is chosen randomly from within the 10% and the amulet holder will join a game of that value if it exists? And if it doesn't it will try a different number until it finds one? Or are you proposing that if the value is not found it will go to the closest one? If it goes to the closest one then you might get a strange meta game going on where players are picking numbers that are inside the other numbers that other players currently have active. There will definitely be tactical ways to open games in order to maximise the chance of meeting another amulet holder. I personally don't like this - players should be rewarded for playing the game as usual, not picking strange and low stakes in order to increase their chances.

If you really don't like the idea of a pool/buffer, I think the next best option is simply to have amulet games play for no stakes and add an opt-in check-box on the main page in order to allow for amulet games. When you first tick the checkbox the game could make it clear that if you are matched with an amulet game you will not know, and no money will change hands. If you want to play a high stakes game without the risk during the comp you could always just uncheck the box for that game and recheck it after.

In this system you could even have it so that the amulet holder names a maximum stake as I suggested above, so that if the chosen game is higher than that stake then the game will simply be for the max-stake.

Cobblestone

Member

Registered: 2015-01-28

Posts: 212

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I'm thinking making the amulet games no stakes avoids a lot of issues that have been brought up. As an amulet holder, you're clicking on the Amulet Game button, and still have the option to play regular games. So clicking into an Amulet Game, you'd know they won't win or lose you anything but the amulet. For a non-amulet holder, I think getting the amulet would be a big enough deal that it would make sense for it to replace winning money.

I don't think it changes game behavior either. If the amulet holder didn't care about the amulet, they'd just leave the game and drop it anyway. If they want it, then they're going to play to keep it. It's at stake just like money is usually at stake. The non-amulet holder wouldn't know it's an amulet game, so they'd play normally as well.

So an amulet holder could be paired up with any random open game within $.01-5 instead of based on a bankroll percentage, which would avoid making things penny heavy.

Just my two cents.

cullman

Member

Registered: 2015-01-01

Posts: 65

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I don't like the idea of non-money amulet games, cause right now you can't even practice the game with zero stakes.  Why would we have tournament play be less financially impactful than how a beginner is at first forced to learn the game.  Additionally, if the goal of the amulet tournament is to get new players and have them learn and love the game I think having to put real money in and play for real money is key for that.

You know what would work is if we just had amulet games set at a few different fixed amounts : .10, .50, $2.00, $5.00... 

Just saying (again, and again)

joshwithguitar

Member

Registered: 2015-01-07

Posts: 128

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

cullman: Even with no stakes amulet games the vast majority of games you will be playing during the tournament will be for real stakes and you won't even know that you are in no-stakes games until you actually have an amulet. And then you will be playing to keep the amulet, so it won't feel like no stakes.

cullman

Member

Registered: 2015-01-01

Posts: 65

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

cullman: Even with no stakes amulet games the vast majority of games you will be playing during the tournament will be for real stakes and you won't even know that you are in no-stakes games until you actually have an amulet. And then you will be playing to keep the amulet, so it won't feel like no stakes.

I get your proposal, I think, but I have the same problem with it that I do with the original proposal which is it looks like you are playing for money but you are not.  You can say the amulet is stakes, but there are cases where it may not be.  Imagine if it's the last hour of the tournament (and I haven't played the tournament at all) and I have $9 in my account and I chose to play $4.50, instead of increasing my account by 50% I get a copper amulet and no chance to win the physical one.  Again, strange behavior IMHO.  In the strata model if you want to play a $5 amulet game you play a $5 amulet game, if you want to play a $5 non-amulet game you play a $5.01 or $4.99.  Personally, I also think there should be buttons on the create/join screen that just say :
^^^^ ^^
00000.00
vvvvv  vv
[In Yellow or some color]
"Amulet Tournament Play - click here for info"
[.01] [.10] [.50] [$1] [$2] [$5]

If the player hits one of the tournament buttons, says [.50] The screen would change to

[Now the number is in yellow ]
^^^^ ^^
00000.50   (Amulet Tournament Play - click here for more info)
vvvvv  vv

The same color change and indication of amulet tournament play would happen if the user manually entered one of the amulet tournament strata amounts, like .50.

It's explicit, it solves most of collusion, it allows for people to play amulet games or regular games, it creates an opportunity to explain the tournament in game to someone who may not have stumbled across the tournament without reading the boards or news about the tournament. Etc, etc.  Ok I am done beating this dead horse.

Last edited by cullman (2015-03-09 10:13:43)

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

but if you have $200, you could be playing for $20 and not even know it!

Don't forget the $5 cap!  So, if we used 10% max, and your balance is over $50, you'd never play amulet games higher than $5.

Also, note that you only keep playing these games if you keep winning with the amulet, which means you'll have more and more money.  You can't have a long losing streak.  After you lose one game, you drop the amulet.  So it's not like your bankroll will be gone.

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, the idea was that you'd pick some random number in the 10% range of the amulet-holder's bankroll (or $5, max) and then look for the closest already-proposed game (half the time) or propose a game with that randomly-chosen stake and wait for a joiner (half the time).  You're right that there will be some meta there with naming the most likely stakes, but I think that's okay.

By "Funny Money" I mean a situation where a dollar isn't a dollar in some way.  "Oh, you THOUGHT you were in for $X, and you thought your opponent was too, but nope, it was actually an amulet."  This game treats money in a very exact way.  It's always played for real money.  Money is money.  That's the point.  We don't match a $50 player with a 5-cent player.  If you want to play against a $50 player, you have to put in $50 yourself.  That's very core to the experience of the game.  There are no money surprises.  When you watch the chips fly at the end and then do the math yourself, it always adds up, down to the 1000th of a dollar.  Monetary perfection.

Cullman, there are a few reasons I'm not jumping on your proposal:

1.  It doesn't solve the fundamental problem of collusion, because the $5 tier would be much more sparsely populated than the 50-cent tier.  So far, 90% of players have deposited less than $10.  The vast majority of people are playing for very low stakes, and $5 games tend to sit there for a while.  If you let the amulet holder control the stakes, even tiered stakes, you let them control the stakes.  And colluders also control the timing.

2.  It funnels the behavior of non-amulet holders in a way I don't like.  This is your first time playing the game, and there's all this extra stuff on the screen.  All these tier buttons.

The current stake picking screen is clean and wide open.  I want non-amulet holders to have that experience (whoa, I can play for 1 cent or 2 cents or 11 cents...).  Ideally, for non-amulet holders, the game should look and behave identically to how it does now.

There are only going to be 36 amulet holders, so it's okay for the game to change for them in substantial ways.  Not letting them pick their own stakes, so their collusion partner doesn't even KNOW what game to join by stake number, gets the benefits of the "funny money" proposal without having the non-amulet holders getting shocked by a funny-money reveal.  They'll be shocked to win the amulet on top of the money that they were expecting to win, and their amulet-holding opponent will be in for the same stakes.

Also, some people are talking about ways this contest can maximize the tribute.  Like, shouldn't the contest encourage people to play for big stakes?  It's really not about that at all.  It's about getting loads of new people into the game and ensuring a vibrant launch, and hopefully a snowball effect (which will lead to great tributes into the future).

joshwithguitar

Member

Registered: 2015-01-07

Posts: 128

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I guess I have some selfish reasons for not liking your system. Times of great player influx are generally great times to play if you actually want to make some money playing, but your system will strongly encourage games that are < 50c as these are far more likely to be amulet games. I would have to make the choice between maximising my in game profits or maximising my chance of an amulet. And that is only if there are enough $1+ games for that choice to exist.

Also, if players are encouraged not to play 1c games you still haven't given a solution to the problem of players intentionally reducing their bankroll to 19c once they have an amulet in order to maximise their chance of meeting their 1c playing colluders.

cullman

Member

Registered: 2015-01-01

Posts: 65

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Cullman, there are a few reasons I'm not jumping on your proposal:

Does that mean I have to stop talking about it?

joshwithguitar

Member

Registered: 2015-01-07

Posts: 128

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I've just thought of one further annoying thing about the current system.

CM is a game in which as the stakes rise, the level of play tends to rise as well. This will mean that the higher your bankroll (up to $50) the more difficult your opponent will be on average when you have the amulet. This gives a strong, and annoying, incentive to reduce your bankroll to as low as is practical for the completion. I would personally be encouraged to either cash out or create a second account for the competition rather than just play on as usual.

AnoHito

Member

Registered: 2014-11-24

Posts: 116

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I think maybe the solution here is to simplify things as much as possible. Let's say you were to make it so all amulet games had to be played for $0.25. I think $0.25 is a good amount, because it is an amount that won't be too scary for new players, but still creates enough pressure that they will take matches seriously. If you create a special amulet tournament at the $0.25 level, players will always know if they are playing for the correct amount to trigger an amulet game, so there will be no weird ambiguity about what amount you need to play for. And if the amount is fixed, it makes collusion the most difficult because you need to attempt to collude against what is sure to be a large amount of people all playing for the same amount. It doesn't completely prevent collusion, but it reduces the chances of collusion to the minimum. If you combined that with some sort of rule that said you could only play an amulet game against the same person for the same amulet once (or at least some reasonable finite limit), collusion would become more or less impractical.

While this may annoy some people who want to use the tournament to try and drive the stakes up, if your goal is to build the player base, then trying to keep people from playing for high stakes early on is a very good idea. Otherwise a lot of players will end up with profit charts that look like this: http://humbit.com/cmbot/index.php?alias=context+fabric . In fact, I think that for the sake of the game's long term growth, limiting someone's maximum stakes to a fixed percent of their bankroll would be a very good idea. While ideally you would like people to make good decisions about the stakes they play for on their own, experience has shown up that most players will not do this unless they don't have a choice.

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, if your goal during the tournament is to make money.... hmm... I guess any amulet structure that encourages low stakes won't be good for you.  But you would be a counter-example for your money pool idea.  If a good player played loads of high stakes games against low-stakes players and won most of them, they would suck the money pool dry.

You're right about the downward pressure on player balances.

What if it was just "a random stake of $5 or less." and you had to have at least $5 in your balance to play an amulet game?  Maybe $5 is too high in this case.  Then you'd have NO control over your stakes, there'd still be a whole range of low-stakes games on offer.  Maybe it could be a random stake of $2 or less.

The cool thing about this is that if you have a winning streak while holding an amulet, your balance will be growing, so it's not like you'll go deep into financial ruin while holding it.

Cobblestone

Member

Registered: 2015-01-28

Posts: 212

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I think $0.25 is a good amount, because it is an amount that won't be too scary for new players

I'd like to think I'm not so new anymore, but $0.25 games still scare me!

joshwithguitar

Member

Registered: 2015-01-07

Posts: 128

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, if your goal during the tournament is to make money.... hmm... I guess any amulet structure that encourages low stakes won't be good for you.  But you would be a counter-example for your money pool idea.  If a good player played loads of high stakes games against low-stakes players and won most of them, they would suck the money pool dry.

I don't think this would be a real problem in my system as: 1) amulet games won't come up that often, and 2) those holding an amulet will tend to be stronger players.

What if it was just "a random stake of $5 or less." and you had to have at least $5 in your balance to play an amulet game?  Maybe $5 is too high in this case.  Then you'd have NO control over your stakes, there'd still be a whole range of low-stakes games on offer.  Maybe it could be a random stake of $2 or less.

Hmm, this could mean some unlucky player just learning the game and given an amulet suddenly losing $2 in their first amulet game.

And now, if the system was closest to a random sum from 0-$2 this would encourage play in the $1 region, which would lead to a bunch of players soon not having the money to play amulet games. And if very few players played in the $1-$2 stakes area then this would be the best place to hang out to get an amulet. So it would be better just to pull someone from a randomly selected game starting in that region.

AnoHito

Member

Registered: 2014-11-24

Posts: 116

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

What if it was just "a random stake of $5 or less." and you had to have at least $5 in your balance to play an amulet game?  Maybe $5 is too high in this case.  Then you'd have NO control over your stakes, there'd still be a whole range of low-stakes games on offer.  Maybe it could be a random stake of $2 or less.

I would think even less than $1.00 would be better... Keep in mind most newer players don't play for much above $0.10. I actually think there is a sort of weird psychology going on with that. Normally, if you were to lose $0.10, you wouldn't think twice about it. It's such a small amount, it normally doesn't seem worth worrying about. But in Cordial Minuet, whenever you play a game, in the back of your mind you are always thinking how much trouble you went through to win that $0.10 in the first place, or how much work it would be to get it back if you lost it. It artificially inflates the value of the money in your mind well above what it is actually worth. It is almost the reverse of how a casino would try to frame their psychology. Most casinos are very good at getting you to think of your own money as practically worthless, and to throw it away without a second thought.

Anyway, if you really think the stakes need to be random, I think you should be careful about how the joining mechanics will actually work. When you create an amulet game, are you creating a game that other people will see, or are you setting the client up to look for a random game within a certain range? The problem with creating a game, is that if the stakes really are random, it would be fairly easy to spot an amulet game in the game list. For example, if you saw a game list that said "$0.01, $0.02, $0.10, $0.15, $0.73", you could probably take an educated guess about which one was the amulet game. But if you set it up so that the client would have to join an existing game to play an amulet game, it would be much less obvious.

Dan_Dan84

Member

Registered: 2015-02-14

Posts: 106

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

I would think even less than $1.00 would be better... Keep in mind most newer players don't play for much above $0.10. I actually think there is a sort of weird psychology going on with that. Normally, if you were to lose $0.10, you wouldn't think twice about it. It's such a small amount, it normally doesn't seem worth worrying about. But in Cordial Minuet, whenever you play a game, in the back of your mind you are always thinking how much trouble you went through to win that $0.10 in the first place, or how much work it would be to get it back if you lost it. It artificially inflates the value of the money in your mind well above what it is actually worth. It is almost the reverse of how a casino would try to frame their psychology. Most casinos are very good at getting you to think of your own money as practically worthless, and to throw it away without a second thought.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but it's just amazing to see somebody frame my thoughts exactly as they've been forming in my head. In the thread about "Why do you play?", Jason's example of play money in online poker is exactly how I feel here-- even though in CM, it's real money. In online play money poker, where you get automatic refills to $1000, once you hit $5000, you're far more careful with your money. So in CM, I might have hit, say, $0.10 in profit playing penny games, which is perhaps the equivalent of $5000 in online poker play money: both of them have no value (or nearly no value), but you still know how hard you've worked to earn that, and you don't want it to disappear. In the "real world," I make more than $0.10 when I go make myself a cup of tea at work. In CM, that $0.10 involved playing and winning (and losing) a lot of games.

So, to bring this back on topic... Yeah, I don't think amulet holders should have completely randomized stakes (I would hate to be excited about touching a gold amulet... only to lose both the amulet and $2 in my next game). 10% of the bankroll seems good: hopefully it doesn't lead to too much downward pressure on stakes selection and incentive to withdraw money to increase the odds of getting amulet games (I think the $3 cheque fee might also be a disincentive for the latter).

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Josh, yeah, with a full-random-range mechanism, it could just pick an existing sub-$5 game half the time, or propose a random sub-$5 stake the other half of the time.  It wouldn't need to pick a stake first and then look for the closest matching game.  So there would be no attractor.  All games under $5 are uniformly likely to be picked.  (The reason for picking a stake first and then looking for matches was to prevent penny games from being the attractor in a system where we were picking stakes in the 5%-bankroll range---a penny game would be a possible choice for EVERY amulet holder.)

It has to do the 50-50 thing for creating and joining games or else non-amulet holders would never want to join or never want to create.  I want non-amulet holders both creating and joining games like normal.

In terms of the new player experience, well, super-conservative new player play isn't totally what I had in mind.  Yeah, you CAN put in only $2, but you should probably put in more.  So if you want a chance at an amulet, put in at least $5.

Also, if you're just trying to GET an amulet, playing lots of low-stakes games is a fine way to do that.  Playing lots of $5 game is an equally good way to do that, for a high-stakes player.

Once you HAVE the amulet, you'll be playing games with an average stake of $2.50.  Where each chip is 2.5 cents.  That seems okay.  If you don't want to risk it, just drop the amulet or ignore it until it auto-drops.

LiteS

Member

Registered: 2015-01-27

Posts: 82

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Wait, JWG brings up a good point, the average skill of players increases as game buy-in increases. We could use this fact in the amulet games.

Why not have a counter, say your first game with an amulet is a penny, second is two pennies, third is four, etc. Maybe that increases too fast, but it's elegant. You could program it so the amount of money you win gets pushed to the next amulet game. (i.e., say you walk away with $3.78 from a $2 game. Next amulet game you'll wager $3.78.) Also, this way you never lose more than the initial penny (you're playing with winnings) I suppose this doesn't solve collusion, but man does it build tension quick.

Another problem is the previously mentioned "No amulet player joins a created game" thing. Hmm, maybe have it use the amount you've won with this amulet as a max value for your possible game?

Edit: This assumes that tracking amount won while holding each specific amulet is an easy thing to implement.

Last edited by LiteS (2015-03-10 18:57:44)

Cobblestone

Member

Registered: 2015-01-28

Posts: 212

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

you'll be playing games with an average stake of $2.50.

Aw man... I really want an amulet, but a single loss while holding it would cost me more than the entirety of my lifetime profits! Guess I gotta start practicing at higher stakes.

I'm guessing the idea that amulet games are only 5% of the holder's bankroll is out because of collusion? I liked that because it was in line with Asminthe's bankroll management guideline. It seems like having games with that high of stakes means only seasoned veterans who are used to and can afford large stakes like that will be able to win an amulet. Newbies and little guys are probably out of the running.

Last edited by Cobblestone (2015-03-10 20:55:07)

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Yeah, it was out because it would motivate players to alter their balances in order to control their amulet game stakes.  You know, most amulet holders would want to rack wins on penny games (to find easy opponents).  So they'd dump their balance down really low to ensure that 5% of their balance was a penny.  That would also help them collude, perhaps, because the games they were joining would no longer be random.

And dumping your balance is pretty easy.  You don't need to pay a $3 check fee.  Just dump the money by throwing a game to an alt account.

With a fixed range for ALL players, no player has any control over their amulet stakes.

The rising stake thing is a cool idea, but the whole point of this discussion is to let amulets pass around without collusion being used to rack up amulet points.

Cobblestone

Member

Registered: 2015-01-28

Posts: 212

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

That makes sense, but at the same time it's a bit disappointing. I really wanted to participate, but I'm not sure I want to risk 1/3rd of my bankroll each time I get an amulet.

LiteS

Member

Registered: 2015-01-27

Posts: 82

Re: Working Rules for Launch Contest

Yeah, it was out because it would motivate players to alter their balances in order to control their amulet game stakes.  You know, most amulet holders would want to rack wins on penny games (to find easy opponents).  So they'd dump their balance down really low to ensure that 5% of their balance was a penny.  That would also help them collude, perhaps, because the games they were joining would no longer be random.

And dumping your balance is pretty easy.  You don't need to pay a $3 check fee.  Just dump the money by throwing a game to an alt account.

With a fixed range for ALL players, no player has any control over their amulet stakes.

The rising stake thing is a cool idea, but the whole point of this discussion is to let amulets pass around without collusion being used to rack up amulet points.

Good point on the balance dumping. The consequences of that create this rather awkward amulet farming situation for 2 accounts that I hadn't thought of, for someone who didn't want to risk the full $5:

Account 1 has say .10 and searches penny games for an amulet. When they get one, they only risk a max of about .10 for an amulet game, avoiding the $2.50 average risk. If said account loses 5 cents from a run of bad luck, the price for moving .05 from an alt "bank" account is only .0005. You could say "Account minimum balance to play amulet games is $5", but that's a nasty little clause.

If you use rising maximum I proposed, even low stakes players could rack up amulet points, as they would always have enough in their bankroll to play, so the requirement of "You've won $2 with this amulet, therefore you need $2 to play another game with this amulet" makes sense. (At least the first time they get a specific amulet, since you'll presumably have the all the winnings you've earned with the amulet you're currently holding.).

I suppose my proposal is a button that says "Risk up to $X and your amulet to gain points on this amulet" and "Drop Amulet", options for an amulet player only. X is the amount of money they've won with said amulet, rounded up to the nearest penny per game, not counting the game in which they won they first won the amulet from the opponent. When the Risk button is pressed, the game follows one of two paths:

Create game of random stake $X or less after delay of rand(0-60) seconds (Was the time delay thing already debunked? Sorry if it has.)
Join game of random stake $X or less after a delay of rand(0-60) seconds

If you don't have at least $X in your account (Which you should at least the first time you encounter a specific amulet), you won't be able to play with the amulet.