CORDIAL MINUET ENSEMBLE

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

Anyone with a negative score would just create a new account to get back to 0.  So, obviously, we can't let scores go negative.  We can still let people lose points after gaining them.  As long as they don't go below zero, they're never motivated to ditch their account.

Jere, you point out the difference between loss-win and win-loss if we floor the scores at 0.  However, there is no way around this, because someone who has loss-win should create a second account before playing the win, right?

I also worry about the "after day 1, I stand no chance" problem.  It seems like spacing the prizes out over many days could help with this.  It could be two per day.  I'm currently leaning toward 12 amulets (3, 4, 5 gold, silver, copper), so it could be six days, with the following pattern:

copper-silver
copper-silver
copper-silver
copper-gold
copper-gold
silver-gold

Or it could be 12 days, starting with copper and ending with gold.

But how do we deal with one person from winning more than one?  If you win a copper on day 1, are you blocked from winning gold on day 6?

Cobblestone

Member

Registered: 2015-01-28

Posts: 212

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

But how do we deal with one person from winning more than one?  If you win a copper on day 1, are you blocked from winning gold on day 6?

Personally, I liked how prizes were resolved in the original amulet contest. Someone couldn't win two, and would get the better prize. That way you don't have folks disappointed they didn't win anything and someone has won two. Also, awarding them like you've outlined in reverse order still incentivises early winners to continue playing for better prizes. So in this scenario you'd award the prizes at the end of the contest, with the person getting the gold from day 6, and the copper would go to the person in second.

Then again, I may like this type of reward structure because it's the reason I won $30...

Last edited by Cobblestone (2015-04-16 20:02:31)

LiteS

Member

Registered: 2015-01-27

Posts: 82

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

But how do we deal with one person from winning more than one?  If you win a copper on day 1, are you blocked from winning gold on day 6?

A simple solution would be if someone wins copper day 1 and then gold day 6, extend the competition a day and have the day 1 copper be day 7's prize instead. This would mean a bit of a wait on the physical prize delivery, but digital prizes could still be delivered throughout the contest.

I think prompt, daily digital prize delivery during the contest will likely be good for the game's economy.

You could say "Win two coppers, trade for a silver while supplies last" and "silver and copper trade for a gold". Should work out fine as long as the digital money prize was structured so that double copper prize is less than or equal to silver prize. Just pay the winner the digital difference between the two prizes and you're not out any less when you return the copper to the pool. Problem here is the golds will likely be gobbled up early. Once they are (and later silvers), you'd have to mark those players as ineligible to win the remaining coppers.

All that said, I'm not sure if daily amulets is a great idea because of time zones, and I'm not sure if I like the idea of daily point resets. I think Josh will already have a hard enough time finding a game against an American cabal member, but that fight is pretty unavoidable.

jere

Member

Registered: 2014-11-23

Posts: 298

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

I'm currently leaning toward 12 amulets (3, 4, 5 gold, silver, copper), so it could be six days, with the following pattern:

What happened to 36? Let me guess. You tried the first one and were like THIS IS A PAIN!

Jere, you point out the difference between loss-win and win-loss if we floor the scores at 0.  However, there is no way around this, because someone who has loss-win should create a second account before playing the win, right?

Yea I get it. I was hoping there might be another solution somehow, but I guess not allowing negative points is OK.

One piece of input I will give: while clearly it is better to have a "cabal" than just "The Creator" to create special matches, as more people will encounter these matches, the concept is not quite as exciting. The idea of "This might be a game against Jason Rohrer, and if I win, I score special points" is very powerful. Playing against a faceless cabal... not quite as interesting.

Yup. I still think the marketing aspect of playing the creator here is really valuable (along with the cabal of course).

---

Canto Delirium: a Twitter bot for CM. Also check out my strategy guide!

Dan_Dan84

Member

Registered: 2015-02-14

Posts: 106

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

But how do we deal with one person from winning more than one?  If you win a copper on day 1, are you blocked from winning gold on day 6?

Answer one: Yep. It's in line with the risk/reward nature of CM. Play well near the beginning, win a copper. Bide your time and only play near the end, maybe you'll win a gold. Or nothing.

Answer two: No. Another incentive for multiple account play. Reward people like Cobblestone suggested (though I suppose one person behind multiple accounts could still walk away with multiple amulets... But there's really no way around that, is there?).

Suggestion: Choose the top 36 scorers at the end of the contest, OR ~6 people per day who are the top scorers. At the end of the contest, draw 12 people randomly. Those 12 win amulets, the others win cash prizes.

Of course, that doesn't account for the higher value attached to silver and gold. And it also might be too close to a chance-based sweepstakes, legally speaking.

claspa

Member

Registered: 2015-01-15

Posts: 72

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

But how do we deal with one person from winning more than one?  If you win a copper on day 1, are you blocked from winning gold on day 6?

Personally, I liked how prizes were resolved in the original amulet contest. Someone couldn't win two, and would get the better prize. That way you don't have folks disappointed they didn't win anything and someone has won two. Also, awarding them like you've outlined in reverse order still incentivises early winners to continue playing for better prizes. So in this scenario you'd award the prizes at the end of the contest, with the person getting the gold from day 6, and the copper would go to the person in second.

Then again, I may like this type of reward structure because it's the reason I won $30...

I really like this idea!
It would keep people engaged. If you won an amulet the other day, you will try to get a better one. If you are second place to one, you will try to get the next one and hope for the number one guy to get a better one.
It favors people who were the best in the time period but also players who continously have a good more than average score.

jasonrohrer

Administrator

Registered: 2014-11-20

Posts: 802

Re: Fourth test contest with MONEY prizes

Yeah, seems like this is easy enough to just have people "upgrade" from copper if they win gold later and their copper goes to the second-place person on that day, as needed.  I would just figure all of that out by hand when I'm shipping out the amulets.

Also, as far as dual accounts winning two, I guess there's no for-sure way around that, but I'll be in touch with each winner for shipping instructions, so that will make it less appetizing for people... lying directly to me via email, etc.

Jere, yeah, 36 is a lot.  I don't know if I'd have any skin left on my fingers after all that polishing.  Also, that number came from a time when I imagined them passing around and each held by one person, so there needed to be a lot of them.