BIG BAD WOLF: How about then, if a player bids "0", then they fall into the pond, and all other bets are "refunded" and the next round starts with everyone on the same amount as points as the previous round but with the "resigned" player in the pond??

Walter Montego: I think that if there is a pattern of collusion among some players with no logical explaination (like this most recent incident) then these people will eventually be found out and booted from the site and lose their bkr. In the meantime just play and have fun with it...

BIG BAD WOLF: If it is in fact determined by the globs and Fencer that stating what you are going to bid is cheating, then anyone who does this should be banned from playing and lose their bkr. Simple enough, but you must determine if it is in fact cheating (or if brainking thjinks it is cheating) and let everyone know in the rules that it is prohibited.

Walter Montego: You can call it a collusion all you want, it sounds like sour grapes to me.

If there really was a collusion, wouldn't it have made sense to "pull it" towards the end of the pond where it could have made a real difference??

It's a game of Pond. Why on earth would I want to, or anyone else for that matter, cheat? There's no prize on offer.

grenv: I've changed my mind. I will try to win the Ponds that I'm currently in, but will no longer play this game when those games are finished. The game Risk has this same problem to it and there is no way to eliminate it.

Please, leave ponds as they are. Problems like this will always happen in multiplayer games, they cannot be eliminated by more complicated rules. Making the game more complicated takes away some of the motivation for pawns to become paying members.

I'm about to bid 1 in all my ponds. Everyone else may as well bid 2.

Clay: What exactly are you upset at? Scooter betting 1 and posting about it in the discussion panel or Bry and me taking advantage of it? Would it be OK for you if Bry and I didn't bet what we bet? I don't understand that....

Bry: The problem with someone who bids 0 should be the same as a resign, is lets say the lowest person on the list only has 200 points left. So of course, everyone else bids 201. But they decided to resign - leaving everyone with good 201 bids to fall into the pond. So that is not fair either.

Just bid 0 or 1, and don't tell anyone. Telling anyone is cheating. I don't know this "Scooter", but what he did is cheating in my opinion.

Bry: I'm thinking of doing the same. You can say all you want, but it looks like collusion to me and I ain't going to play under these circumstances.

Clay - are you serious? after what happened last round and the discussion in here you go and post that on discussion?

Clay has just posted this....

ClayNashvilleTn: (13. June 2005, 17:44:12) OK, I am very upset at what happened in this last round! I will be with drawing on this next round by bidding 1

Bry: That sounds like a good way to do it too.

Walter Montego: I said ages ago that if a player bid's "0" then that should be a "resign", with the lowest player still falling in addition to the "resigned" player. That way, it does not affect the game.

It works on Round 1, so why not extend it to all rounds and advertise the new rule??

Seems the logical and easy fix to such problems.

Czuch Chuckers: If someone resigns, a notice could be sent to all people in the Pond and the time moved to the next day's time. Since we now have one less player it wouldn't add to the length of the Pond doing that. Everyone one involved would get plenty of time to change their bid or leave it alone.

Czuch Chuckers: Quite right. I saw Scooter's post (and no - I dont even know him or her - which answers the question on discussion) and decided to gamble and bet 2. Pedro obviously did the same but bet 10. It could have so easily gone wrong and I would have been out early but it didnt.

I agree, if you dont want to play, just bet "0" or "1" and dont tell anyone, but I can assure you there is or was no conspiracy before any "accusations" are banded about.

Seems to me that the 2 players who had the guts to chance it that round were rewarded for their gamble.

Czuch Chuckers: Resigning is a loss, so I'd think you'd stay on the fell in list.

For all that discussion that was had about making it possible to resign, I don't recall anyone mentioning just taking yourself out of the Pond. That seems like the least disruptive way to have someone resign.

.... although what happens when you have 500 points left and are in last place and I bid 501 and you resign after I make my bid? The only real way is for you to bid all of your points, and not just try and be the low bidder. Then you would be at zero and everyone would see that, and you would not even have to make another play.

Walter Montego: That seems like a good "resign" alternative. Just so long as they still remain on the "fell into the pond" list, so that you could not just remove yourself from a bad game to avoid the drop in bkr :)

Look folks... get over it already. There is no foul, imo. Anyone can post anything they want to in any game. Doesnt make it true or anything. You also may read it (unless you play before them and miss it) but what you do with that info is up to you. As long as people arent telling their friends only, etc, it seems ok to me. Pedros 10 bid could have just as easily put him in the pond, right?


We have discussed the "resign" option at length. There seems to be no real solution and even if there is, it seems Fencer is not interested in implimenting it anyway.

Walter Montego:Very simple,the creator of the pond should then delete the person or persons after the fact.
The rule would be simple,if a person declares they bid 1 2 or what ever the case may be,then everyone should not be allowed to bid and have Fencer automatically start the next bid,providing the creator checks the bids and give him the pond # and restart the bid minus that person.

Yes, simply eliminating yourself from the Pond would seem like a fair way to leave the game too. Then it wouldn't matter at all what you bid. You'd just cease to be in the game.

Walter Montego:agree but in the first rounds should have the limitations placed ect like the first 5 rounds but then again if they stayed in the game it would eventually ruin it in the end.

Time for my math to go to work.lol
296 pond players to date 96 over the provisional.

BIG BAD WOLF: That's fair if they keep it quiet too. Thing is they can message their buddies and do it that way. Simple phone is all it'd take.

I think my idea for being able to resign on the turn after would be fair. It wouldn't stop conspiracies, but it would enable the honest person to get out of the game without giving anyone and undo advantage.

Universal Eyes: This idea of not allowing you to bid lower than a previous doesn't sound like a workable thing to do to me. There's times when it's best to bid low. Not being allowed to bid lower in later rounds would make the game silly at the end when everyone has less points than their previous bid.

Andre Faria: Yea, I remember that happening in another pond early on (when it was still new for people.)

What happen was someone posted that they did not like the ponds and was going to bid 1 on the next turn.

Problem was I had already placed my bid and never got to see the message - and the few that did got to take advantage of the low bid

It is unfair. I mean if someone wants out, then fine - let them bid 1. But don't let the others know and give them an advantage.

furbster:

ClayNashvilleTn:Correct June 7th 22:53:13

Walter Montego: As I said, not fair in my opinion. Perhaps that turn could be deleted, eliminating scooter and the other players would remain with the same amount of the previous turn?

ClayNashvilleTn: looks like you won't need to know what to bid cos ur not there no more ::laughs evilly and runs away::

Andre Faria: Just what assurance were they given that this Scooter would uphold his plan? I think it unfair to the rest of us that didn't know this guy that he would do this.

I think if someone wants to resign, they should be able to bid 1 and on the turn following it that will be their bid. An anouncement in the Pond will let everyone know this is going to happen and the remaining runners may bid whatever they think appropriate when the time comes.

Andre Faria: hmmmmmmmmmm a little psychology has now entered the mix??

Go to the discussion board of that pond and look at what scooter said in turn 22.

Not fair in my opinion, but that´s not Pedro and Bry´s fault...

How did Scooter know to bid -1
Bry-2 Pedro-10

ClayNashvilleTn:Thanks I and BBW have observed the same issues regarding what i would call team betting,but on the pondside of points,there only hurting and sacri(frying)themselves!

ClayNashvilleTn: Me too.

haha me too.

OK, I would like an explanation of this one?

http://brainking.com/game/Pond?g=145

furbster: Thanks for the tip! Now i'll know how to bid when you sign off!

czuch i signed up without realising it was only an hour and i have to leave in one hour and 20 mins, so i can only move twice mroe.. i need to get lucky

Czuch Chuckers:It could always be pre timed,with an allowable 3 minutes per bid and let the time run an addional 1 minutes past due,causing the late bidders a penalty per minute against there points,which would calculate to a 1 hour and 4 minute game.Also using that method there would be people that don't make that last minute,therefore lowering the time of the game even lower.

Yeah.... its gonna be kinda hard to find 16 people to play and be online for even 5 hours, but 1 hour would be more realistic. (I think) It will be interesting to see how many people fall in encers 1 hour game because they are not online to move.

Czuch Chuckers: Correct it could possibly be turned into a minimum bid per round,therefore people would be falling in when there unable to keep up to the required bid (example)500 minimum first bid,2nd round,1000,3rd round 1500 and so on,it could be played quicker then a Bingo game.

BIG BAD WOLF: i disagree, 3 minutes is only 48 minutes for a game. Go to the bathroom before starting!!

grenv: Actually 3 minuts is a little short - hopefully no long bathroom breaks!

Maybe a quick 10-15 minute option (both for ponds and tournaments) would be good - that way it would be like almost playing a "live" game, but still a little wiggle room if you get pulled away for a few minutes.

Czuch Chuckers: I like the 3 minute option as well, who's going to be online 16 hours straight?

I like the hour idea.... however, like BBW said, that makes for a 16 hour game and doesnt really seem like a very good option.

My idea (and some others) was for ponds for say 3 minutes or 5 minutes or something like that so a whole game could be completed in an hour or less.

REQUEST: When playing a pond, it is easy to tell the difference between a pond and a dark pond since in dark everything is hidden.

But I notice currently the only difference in the rain is the little "name" with a green dot near the top.

Is there a way you can make it look a little more different - possible put a green outline around the running players list so it will be easier to tell something is different (Like is done with all the chess variants so you can quickly tell what you are playing by the outline color)

Wow - 1 hour time limits - so basicly for a 16 player pond, you beter make sure you are on-line during the 15 hours following the start. (Well for rain, I guess it would be at least 7 hours.) (then again, I guess a little less if multiple players fall in.)

Would it make since to add a rule that says when the last 2 players are left, only the lowest bid will fall - leaving the higher bid to win?