|
Post by Cyrus on Jul 15, 2013 16:13:05 GMT
"It seems the last numbers have just come in, so let's put them up on the board."
In third place, the dealer who nobly filled an absentee player's role. Alydar - $828 + $810 = $1638 But really, though, In second place, a newcomer who helped this game get run at all! Shagura - $924 + $818 = $1742 The real winner was the LGT. And in first, an old time observer, Freih! Freih - $996 + $942 = $1938 LGT - $362 + $258 + $62 = $682 "Still, congratulations to all of you for sticking out this long. Russian Roulette, Mark 2 is now complete."
|
|
|
Post by Alydar on Jul 15, 2013 16:30:10 GMT
Wow. Yeah. I played this game way too risky. And I THOUGHT Shagura's bullet was coming up soon so this was the last risk I was going to take... whelp. I guess it was a bad risk to take... Good game, everyone! Maybe next time I'll remember to use some strategy? Maybe? ...well, I doubt I could do much worse.
|
|
|
Post by Shagura on Jul 15, 2013 20:03:40 GMT
Alydar - But I'm glad you'd taken the risk, because if you hadn't, i would've shoot on that round. I thought that my bullet was just in the next round... Yeah, good game!
|
|
|
Post by Alydar on Jul 16, 2013 2:19:47 GMT
If it makes you feel better, I was pretty confident your bullet was in the next round as well (or sometime after that). Just like with Freih... >.< But if BOTH of us are thinking the same thing, we must be right! This is a democracy that I live in, right? And two outvotes one! Cyrus, you must be wrong! The bullet was in chamber 17!!! I haven't lost! *ends BS logic here ...for now* Also, fun fact. Aside from my bullet at 5, the bullets were each 3 chambers apart from each other. Also, the starting chamber was 5, as I deduced very early on (Round 3). That didn't help anything, though, considering Shagura basically never shot...
|
|
|
Post by Cyrus on Jul 16, 2013 3:45:42 GMT
Democracy? Ha! Not when I'm dealing! Oh... I suppose I can take off this mask now...
|
|
|
Post by 10k on Jul 16, 2013 4:13:11 GMT
Wait, you guys were actually gambling??
Also, any of you guys plan on repeating this game? Any modifications to the rules you'd like?
|
|
Freih
Observer
Posts: 347
|
Post by Freih on Jul 16, 2013 11:40:11 GMT
I could repeat it, but not right away, because I expect not to have a stable internet connection soon for a while.
As for the rule changes, I would change the bets: First pass: 7 Second pass: 10 Thirs: 13 Fourth: 16 Fifth: 19
|
|
|
Post by 10k on Jul 17, 2013 7:21:50 GMT
Care to give an explanation yourself, or would you like me to explain it myself?
|
|
|
Post by Alydar on Jul 17, 2013 15:35:57 GMT
I'd agree with some change of bets. I feel doubling of bets made only the later shots really effective, meaning most of the time a shot on 4 would go through (since shots on 3 were not that good...). Also, there were times that I shot on 4 not to take the +10 that resulted but to stop the opponent from getting the +20 that they would have gotten. And it would require two full times of shooting on 4 to counter that shot on 5 that would inevitably result.
Also, the game was not at all decided by antes. It simply wasn't. There wasn't enough to counter the bullets. Yes, the most you could get in a shot was a +20, the most you could lose in a shot was -110, and there were 5 empty shots to every bullet, making it about +100 to -110 payoff ...if it were possible to get +20 each of those rounds. Instead, it was at most +84 to -110 payoff, assuming players are okay with paying a rather hefty sum to the LGT. Yes, shooting constantly should be a bad strategy, but going up against someone who constantly passes should allow someone to pretty much offset the times they shoot themselves with the times they gain money. This was the strategy I was kind of trying to do (also, I was getting fed up with Shagura constantly passing in our game...). As it was, passing constantly was a pretty good strategy, assuming there were a few safe shots to take. The stop to that was the money going to the LGT, but that weighed differently in different people's minds...
Maybe that was just how we played, but I think a big part of that was the antes as well. Turn 1 is a pretty much guaranteed pass, but then so is turn 2 with the profit of 2. Turn 3 isn't much better (a profit of 4), but turn 4 gets a profit of 10, which starts to be reasonable. Then we have turn 5 which is a profit of 20, or a final pass which makes a profit/loss of (24/2=12)... which doesn't really match up well... When 25 turn 3 shots would be required to offset a single bullet (or 2.5 to offset a turn 4, or 5 to offset a turn 5), it should make sense why so few turn 3 shots were taken. What surprised me early on was Shagura's early shots, but I think she hadn't quite noticed the lack of profit versus large risk yet.
|
|
|
Post by 10k on Jul 17, 2013 23:41:33 GMT
I'd agree with some change of bets. I feel doubling of bets made only the later shots really effective, meaning most of the time a shot on 4 would go through (since shots on 3 were not that good...). Also, there were times that I shot on 4 not to take the +10 that resulted but to stop the opponent from getting the +20 that they would have gotten. And it would require two full times of shooting on 4 to counter that shot on 5 that would inevitably result. Also, the game was not at all decided by antes. It simply wasn't. There wasn't enough to counter the bullets. Yes, the most you could get in a shot was a +20, the most you could lose in a shot was -110, and there were 5 empty shots to every bullet, making it about +100 to -110 payoff ...if it were possible to get +20 each of those rounds. Instead, it was at most +84 to -110 payoff, assuming players are okay with paying a rather hefty sum to the LGT. Yes, shooting constantly should be a bad strategy, but going up against someone who constantly passes should allow someone to pretty much offset the times they shoot themselves with the times they gain money. This was the strategy I was kind of trying to do (also, I was getting fed up with Shagura constantly passing in our game...). As it was, passing constantly was a pretty good strategy, assuming there were a few safe shots to take. The stop to that was the money going to the LGT, but that weighed differently in different people's minds... Maybe that was just how we played, but I think a big part of that was the antes as well. Turn 1 is a pretty much guaranteed pass, but then so is turn 2 with the profit of 2. Turn 3 isn't much better (a profit of 4), but turn 4 gets a profit of 10, which starts to be reasonable. Then we have turn 5 which is a profit of 20, or a final pass which makes a profit/loss of (24/2=12)... which doesn't really match up well... When 25 turn 3 shots would be required to offset a single bullet (or 2.5 to offset a turn 4, or 5 to offset a turn 5), it should make sense why so few turn 3 shots were taken. What surprised me early on was Shagura's early shots, but I think she hadn't quite noticed the lack of profit versus large risk yet. What I expected was like one or two $2 shootings and a bunch of passing until someone shot himself with the bullet, and then the winner of the first bullet passing while the other guy would keep shooting. Until then, it would be a chicken race, building the pot for a chamber or two then just passing. In the latter, every single $ counts, and when the pot doubles every pass, that's really significant. You might shoot chambers just to deny the other guy the chance to make a single $. If you know the other guy is pretend-passing and YOU know there isn't a bullet in there, you need to be shooting. The impression I got from watching was that there was zero cooperation, that all the games were disconnected, especially once I saw the request to speed up shooting and that there was a non-stop slew of $30 pots. If you were to fall massively behind in one game (say, shoot a bullet), then that means the other guy is ahead. You and the out-player are both lagging behind him. In that case, you'd want to form some sort of relationship with the out-player to even it out. As for whether money goes to the LGT, I don't expect people losing sleep because "we're playing into their hands, making them rich." What matters is that the every time the "LGT" wins, that's just a nice of saying that you guys are helping the out-player. ...Well. I didn't play the game, so we can't weight my opinions as much. And of course, the manga had a much weaker penalty of $50, whereas I emphasized the idea of "bullet avoidance." I figured that if you have a no-luck game (unlike the manga), then you'd deserve to lose a bunch of money for mucking up, or at least if you did, you cooperate to even the score. Or you can all leave it up to chance too, I guess. If we're changing anything, I'd rather just have it be the penalty halved (which also implies reducing starting funds a little).
|
|
Freih
Observer
Posts: 347
|
Post by Freih on Jul 18, 2013 10:05:12 GMT
There is, indeed, absolutely no sense in shooting at 1,2, or 3, basically. The only reason to shoot at 1 is to avoid a bet of 2, but a bet of 2 was completely irrelevant this game. When you shoot at 2, you do it to win $2 and avoid betting $4. Considering that if you bet the 4, you're not 100% sure to lose them, it's also not worth it.
Basically, in our game it wasn't true that every single dollar countes.
Well, maybe if nobody shot themselves the entire game, things would be different, but it is unlikely for that to happen. That, and the fact that I don't see any reason for the antes to grow exponentially, is why I suggested a linear scale which mostly preserves the loss of both players after five passes. Even if the next game would be as you described above, what would get broken by linear antes?
As for your pbservation about disconnected games, I don't know about any cooperation between Alydar and Shagura (and there is much evidence suggesting there wasn't any), but I did talk to both of them about things (though it was my initiative 100% of the time).
|
|
|
Post by 10k on Jul 18, 2013 16:25:40 GMT
There's also a bit of math that also emphasized bullet avoidance. Linear: max pot $30/14
It takes 4 big antes to recover+profit from a single shot, or winning 4 straight chambers at max pot to break even. That's not easy, especially if the opponent starts playing defensively. That's why I expected a lot more passing.
Meanwhile, the suggested: max pot $46/30
It's one less chamber. It might not mean a lot at first glance, but with all the crazy shooting I saw, that extra chamber, that's the edge the passing player deserves. If you want to play with linear, then to maintain bullet avoidance:
First pass: 5 Second: 7 Third: 9 Fourth: 11 Fifth: 13
max pot $32/21, so it is still approximately the same difficulty as before.
|
|
|
Post by Alydar on Jul 18, 2013 17:07:19 GMT
I'm... confused at where you're getting your numbers. The linear is... what Freih's suggesting, so wouldn't it also be the suggested? Either way, the numbers you have don't really match with what's there. (Pre-post edit:)Oh, wait... you're doing total pot. That's faulty number logic because people zero out with whatever they paid into the pot, meaning they only profit by what the opponent put in, as follows:
Doubling Rate First pass: $2 Second pass: $4 Third pass: $8 Fourth pass: $16 Fifth pass: $32 Max pot from even (shooting 5): $20 Max pot from odd (shooting 4): $10 Max profit from full pass ( (odd - even) / 2 ): $12
Freih's Linear First pass: $7 Second pass: $10 Third pass: $13 Fourth pass: $16 Fifth pass: $19 Max pot from even (shooting 5): $26 Max pot from odd (shooting 4): $20 Max profit from full pass ( (odd - even) / 2 ): $6.5
10k's Linear First pass: $5 Second pass: $7 Third pass: $9 Fourth pass: $11 Fifth pass: $13 Max pot from even (shooting 5): $18 Max pot from odd (shooting 4): $14 Max profit from full pass ( (odd - even) / 2 ): $4.5
THIS is what I was saying about the numbers not quite being balanced for the pot in regards to the shot penalty. IF it actually did take 4 big antes to recover and profit from a single shot, like you said in your post, then it would be slightly more balanced, considering there are 3 empty chambers to every filled one. Yes, passing is still good, but people are able to come back from a large deficit, assuming they're able to miss a few bullets or have their opponent shoot themselves.
Instead, the game actually took a full 5 big antes, minimum (despite it actually being impossible to get those 5 in a row, meaning it's actually 7 max antes), to match a single bullet. That's very much unrealistic... So the game was decided based on how many times players were shot and not much else. I mean, look at my game with Freih. With one bullet left, I was behind by a single shot. There were 6 rounds left... a full quarter of the game. And yet it was simply impossible for me to catch up, even in a best-case scenario, as long as Freih passed entirely. Even if my bullet were in the LAST chamber, and I used the fact that Freih was passing to my advantage, there was no way for me to win. With a full potential 1/4 of the game left... I mean, sure, passing is supposed to be good, but it should be possible to catch up from a single bullet over the course of 4 chambers (4/24 = 1/6... or even for each bullet). Or even 5 chambers, if 4 seems too few. But having a 7:1 ratio is completely off, and... well, it's partially my fault for not even running the numbers when checking the game. But it's something I ended up noticing more while playing the game than when reading the rules, anyway...
As for why I played as I did, I suppose it stems from my dislike of inactivity and how similar constant passing was to that. Really, it was just... boring, for lack of a better word. And so I shot as much as possible when I didn't have reasonable suspicion that there was a bullet. Sure, it wasn't a great strategy, and luck didn't really work in my favor most of the time, but there should have been more of a potential for recovering from a bullet. Constant max-anteing should almost counter constant passing, dependent on the placement of the last bullet, of course.
All in all, the strategy that worked for this game is a strategy that I would inherently shy away from. This isn't my type of game. And so I completely understand how and why I lost. Still, there were some balance issues with the pot that would need to be worked out if we were to run this again.
|
|
|
Post by 10k on Jul 18, 2013 19:35:01 GMT
I guess I failed math lol.
Assuming we want 4 wins (2 big/2 small) to balance things out: 1. Halving the penalty (to $60?)+ double pay rates should work 2. To make Freih happy, if we're going to incorporate his rates, the penalty should be about $70-75
As for 3 wins (2 big/1 small)...sure, if it turns out the average game length is fewer than 18 turns. Determining 3 or 4 chambers is hard to say having completed only 1 game, but I'd rather err into making sure players are cautious. Seems I overdid that part with the $100 penalty.
|
|
Freih
Observer
Posts: 347
|
Post by Freih on Jul 18, 2013 20:59:38 GMT
$60 shooting penalty and double the antes you originally suggested??? Did you even do the quick calculation and see that shooting yourself would cost you less money then passing the fifth time?
|
|