Bad Bishop: First, A "smaller starting pool" was meant to mean the number of players that start a game.

Second, yes am bored, but I am not very patient, and especially in a new game that I am learning, I want to see results straight away, I really cant wait to see how the "end game" works out in this game. I think even a game with as few as 16 people which will take half a month to complete is too long for people who prefer faster games. And since this game doesnt continue at the pace of the players moves like all other games, I would like to see shorter time limit games, or have a game continue to the next round as soon as everyone has submitted a move.

Czuch Chuckers: Oh, sorry for misunderstanding the "starting pool", in this case I agree with you again. (I'd say more than 30 runners is rather a pain, but 200+ is sooo perverted that it's fun again :-))
Shorter time for a move -- in hours or minutes -- would certainly guarantee quick games and I'd probably participate, but I think on an e-mail game site (as BK is) is 1 day ok.

As Bad Bishop says.....a site that is turn based wouldnt work with 10 mins or 1hr etc etc.
But if the other suggestion of a 1 or 2 day move..but if all have bid, next round comes into play...that would be a good compromise :oD

It seems to be a good compromise, but I'm affraid there would be a problem. (I mean not for me and surely not for the majority of us, sitting in front of a computer 16+ hours a day :-))

Let's say, the deadline for a move is every 24 hours, at 1 pm. A player gives his bid shortly after the previous move, at 2 pm (23 hours before deadline), in the hope that he has 47 hours time for the next move and can leave for a trip or whatever (They say, there is a life outside... :-o). Unfortunatelly all bids will be given in the next 2 hours, the actual move will be done at 4 pm (21 hours before the original deadline) and the next deadline would be at 4 pm next day, 21 hours before our player originally thought...

(Aaaaarrrgghh, I hope you can understand my Pidgin English and what I mean... :-))

Bad Bishop: LOL, yes it was easily understood :)

There are people who routinly play games with longer limits who agree to play a "fast" game, sometime to finish the game in one sitting. Thats all I want to be able to do. People with a life would not have to participate. But as it is right now, the fastest games will still be just under half a month...

furbster: glad I could help out. LOL, but I'm still brainless. Maybe that's the price of being blonde?

really, i put your id in and everything :(

it showed you name as being the id as well .. wonder why. will fencer be able to give u them anyway?

Eriisa:but I'm still brainless

no comment LMAO

Bad Bishop: That is ok Bad Bishop...thats what auto bid is for :oD

furbster: If it wasnt so obviously a language problem, that would be really hilarious!!! ;)

huh, kinda confused about that last post czuch

played with a bugle usually ;o)

Fencer.... the wizard of oz!

Let's make it so the creator of the game can specify the bonus and the starting points. I think the very first game would have played better if the starting point was 1,000 instead of 20,000. Then the bonus of 500 would already be figuring into the play and Czuch would be having a little more fun.

As for the amount of people at the start, I really don't see how that matters much aside from the length of the game. When there's just three people left, the game will be determined by their scores. If close, it could make for a good finish.

Varying the bonus in proportion to the starting point will make a big difference though. From no bonus all the way to say three quarters of the starting point. There's room for lots of experimenting in this game. Now the we can create the game, eventually good amounts will shake out and most creators will try to have parameters near it for a good game. Imagine starting the game with 30 players and 60 or so points and no bonus. Lots of guts and no extraneous bull worry about a bonus awarded. Or same parameters, but a bonus of 30. Now it'd be a whole different deal and you'd have to think about that bonus.

The way the first game is going, I'd be surprised if the bonus figures too much in the final outcome. By the time alesh gets to 0 maybe the bonus will start to figure in the play.

What all of you seem to be forgetting is that some people have a different agenda than playing to win. If any of you are familiar with a board game called "Risk" it only takes one of the players to spoil it for everyone else. All one player in that game has to do is attack one other player until their whole army is depleted. Yes, it makes no sense to play that way, but I've seen it plenty of times. The person that was attacked has suffered a lot and the rest of the players can move to take him out. Three or four handed "Line Five" is the same way. This "Pond" game seems a little more robust to such playing "tactics", but we've already seen some problems from players purposely playing poorly and it having an effect on the rest of the players.

I wonder if one could join too many Pond Tourneys?

furbster: Sorry...

I think she meant she still doesnt have any brains in her head, not in her account LOL

You just misunderstood her, I think, and your response to her was so serious deadpan, I thought it would have been funny, had you meant it as a joke.

furbster: Sorry, I forgot. Doing it now :-)

Fencer: Why is The very first run -1 hour 0 mins on time??

Wait. There was a small bug in the generator. I used resultCode1 instead of resultCode3. Funny, eh? :-D

Very funny. And what does it mean? What is the difference between Code1 and Code3? :-o

Who cares? The problem is already fixed.

Hm, the best tactics for the first run is obviously to bet constantly 5 points. There seem to be every turn some runners who are bored and bet suicidaly less than would be save. :-)

Oh, the sleeping beauty Alesh is already a pawn. I suppose, he won't wake up even after he'll fall into the water. :-)

Anyway, it's interesting that even though almost everybody complained about the long runs caused by too many players, there are 6 new ponds with unlimited number of participants :-)

I noticed that! LOL! I think the only pond one that I did not sign up on was the 21 day game.

What? A 21 day game?! :-o Have fun...

Oh, indeed, with an unlimited number of runners... :-)

Imagine that! ROFL

Ugh, better not... :-)

ROFL!!!! I agree. That would would last a couple of years, I think!

back to the 'the very first run' game. I think I'll stick with 7. Bold, yet safe.

Bad Bishop:

21 days ?
Yikes, I better go get myself out of that one. I didnt notice the days. I was just joining them all in hopes of a better chance of actually winning one

ok fencer thanks :0) there ya go eriisa :) lol

looks like in the "Very First Run" someone has decided to take the bonus away from alesh and make in go swim earlier :)

say, sir Fencer: can you either make a player's ponds show up with all his other games on his main page, or make the red number next to the "Ponds" link clickable like the one next to the "Main Page" link so we don't have to look through the whole list of running ponds to find the one we're playing in? thank you thank you!

I can deal with scrolling down to the 'Running ponds', but I wish there was a way on the 'Ponds to sign up' to show which ones I've signed up for so I don't keep clicking on them.

Cookie sorted the 21 day game. He's a bit thick the lad.

Anyone fancy a bash at the "quick" one I started.???

Fencer - can you add an option so that the creator of the tournament can specify the number of points to start with?

Bry: ROFL, I thought that said '
If you dont fancy trying this - please shut up'

changnig the starting number can reduce the number of rounds ... when you use a low number (for example 100) of points to start with people will have to be very careful to have enough points left in the end .. and will start to bid much lower .. also with less points its more likely to have more than 1 player to have the minimum bet and so more than 1 player can easily fall in the pound per round

woohoo!!

*worship* all hail fencer */worship* :)

all of the sudden I have a red 15 by my ponds list, I don't remember signing up for that many

Vikings: Now it's like for Tournaments link, the number shows how many ponds in sign-up status are listed on that page.

its the total number of games .. the ones which require you to move are now next to the 'main page' link (looking as if you are being invited)

when you are now invited you see (37/1/1)

(i just tested .. its fun :))

the part with the games waiting for you now has two extra boxes for pond games (one for waiting for you, and one for you waiting for the next round)

fencer types too fast! :)

ok, so do we just have to occasionaly look at it to find out if its time to make a bid in one of our games?

Vikings: The red number next to the Main page link informs you about it.

Right top side be exactly fencer

thx

fencer : the smiley above the box in which you can type a message in the pond games when you make your bet ... it doesnt give the popup for me when i hover over it .. clicking on the ? does give me the normal screen though :)

Hrqls: That's right.