You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Announcing my next game, and auditioning for players.
Can't find any audition posts. Is it too late to apply? I'm happy to buy steem to get up to 1500.
Can't find any audition posts. Is it too late to apply? I'm happy to buy steem to get up to 1500.
Great to see that enthusiasm. I didn't get any audition posts at 1500, but a lot of people showed an interest in the idea, so I'm relaunching at $10 / steem. (You'll get 20 steem for passing go instead of 200).
Otherwise exactly the same game.
Do an audition post, tagged #monopoly, and (assuming it's good)
I'll link to it in my relaunch post, calling for others to do the same.
The game will start when I have six viable candidates :)
Ok, so I've had a look at the whole post and a long think about the rules. I'm a former monopoly obsessive and I think the rules are very carefully thought out to make a well balanced game. The idea of each player starting with $1500 is, to me, absolutely essential. If you allow any player to 'open-endedly' buy properties you're essentially handing the game over to the biggest investor. They can offer silly money to buy monopolies and kill off any competition. This might not happen initially, but once players draw enough money from the bank (again the game is set up to ensure a slow drip feed of money to the players) it will become financially viable to offer prices only whales can afford.
I think a fixed buy in for a fixed amount of monopoly money is the only way to ensure a fair and enjoyable game. Players could earn a share of post rewards and/or prize money.
Does this perspective make sense?
I think also the ability for players to leave at any time is a concern. If I make a deal to buy Mayfair and Park Lane and develop them with hotels, I am spending money with a view to making more money from the future rental returns of those properties. If another player then decides things aren't looking good for him and leaves the game, I will never see a return on my investment. I may win kudos for winning the game, but still lose out financially.
Thanks nikflossus. I've given your observations a couple of day's thought, and I think we're already too far removed from a standard game to be purists, although that's always my first instinct too.
If we use steem as the in-game currency, but ringfence it, then each player needs to keep two separate sets of books (or do nothing except play monopoly, declining payouts on each post), to differentiate between money that's part of the game, and money incoming from other sources.
The players could post a running tally over at rolz.org after each turn, but auditing for consistency would add another layer of complexity to the game, and leave the spectators no scope to financially assist their preferred player(s) with their upvotes.
Since the in game currency will have external value, while monopoly money doesn't, we need to face the prospect of players walking away before the end of the match. I think if we make this an option for anyone at any time, then all players can take this into their calculations from the outset, rather than being upset when it inevitably happens.
As to whale action, while it is certainly a possibility, I think it adds an extra touch of the dramatic. The idea that a minnow can put his hand up to play, land on Mayfair/Boardwalk, buy it for 40 steem and have a whale offer him undreamt of riches... that's the kind of drama the folks came to see, and it's a pretty sweet deal for the minnow too.
A whale who desperately wants to win the match and doesn't mind putting in more money than he pulls out is certainly a contender, but whales are just as petty as the rest of us.
I can imagine underdogs being gifted houses, hotels, or straight up cash by other whales.
Certainly the game I'm talking about won't be 'fair' in the sense that everybody starts with the same resources, but it will be fair in that all of the players will get the chance to show their character, entertain the spectators and attract upvotes and followers, for as long as they manage/choose to stay in the game.
Those who start with a lot more money will have a lot more to spend, and those who start with only a little have a chance to walk away with a lot more.
If I'm playing poker against Bill Gates, a tournament is fairer, but a cash game has the potential to be far more lucrative.