01-20-2009, 04:54 AM | #11 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Isanti, MN
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
|
|
01-20-2009, 06:08 AM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Indiana
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
To me, a win is a win is a win. Doesn't matter if you have help or not, doesn't matter how many opponents you have. Sorry, but your way seems to cheapen the victory (pun intended). "Oh, your win isn't as good as the win I had last game, because I won 36 cents and you and Fred only won 12 cents each. HAHA" No I'll stick to the "I win," weither its solo or if I have help, approach. Why? because I do win. Either way, in the end I still get to walk away with the demon's head on a pike and that's all that really matters. |
|
01-20-2009, 07:15 AM | #13 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
Philosophy is great, but you can literally take the above analysis to the bank! The money doesn't lie. Quote:
Each player pitching in twelve cents is equivalent to each loser paying twelve cents to be shared among the winners (and the winner pitching nothing). This is two ways to describe the same situation. Your initial investment doesn't count as "winnings" - in a four way draw (were it possible) it would be correct to say that each player breaks even, and incorrect to say that each player "won" twelve cents. This is a zero sum situation. The total wins must equal the total losses. Of course in practice, there is no difference. You try for the two way if you chance of succeeding plus twice your chance of failing the two way but winning later anyway is greater than twice your chance of declining the two way and winning on your own. This equation hold whether you analise for gross or net winnings. I've simplified it, there is always a chance you'll decline (or fail) the joint effort only to succeed at another such effort later, but let's keep it simple for now. |
||
01-20-2009, 07:25 AM | #14 | |
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
Now if we actually play for twelve cents, I'll be HAHAing all the way to the bank! If you're playing for a sense of personal satisfaction and/or bragging rights only, then the value of a solo win vs a joint win vs a loss is vague and can't be quantified. That's why I advocate playing for twelve cents. If I value a two way win (compared to a solo win) less than you do, then I'll pass on two way opportunities more than you. You'll end up with more shared wins than I have, but I'll have more solo wins than you (because I hold out for them). If we don't quantify it, we might both end up thinking we have a better track record than each other! If we keep score differently in our own minds, we aren't really even playing the same game. The competitive factor reduces in meaningfulness. A simple 12 cents each puts us all on the same page! Incidentally, do you count winning a three way game "as good" as winning a six way game? The later is clearly harder. Last edited by zooma; 01-20-2009 at 07:30 AM. |
|
01-20-2009, 07:44 AM | #15 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
Quote:
This is equivalent to (in a four way game) the losers paying 12 cents each to the winner if one player wins, but eighteen cents each to each winner if two players win. This system matches the philosophy which motivates Cheese8242's playing style I think. I'm fine with such a system too! I just think any game with a chance of shared victory should be played for trinkets, so that everyone quantifies the possibility the same (or else incorrectly). To some people a shared win is a good as a lone win, but to others it's not. If you add consequences to winning or losing, the matter is clear. Otherwise, it's subjective. I have similar views regarding games which are played for points. |
||
01-20-2009, 07:45 AM | #16 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Indiana
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
See, that's the big difference. I play games like Munchkin and Munchkin Quest for fun not competition. Win or lose the game, as long as everyone playing had fun then I win. Your way means less fun for all, because someone is going to be sore for losing money. And in that regards, weither it was a solo win or a dual victory, I still lose. I want everyone to walk away from my table having fun that night. Bringing money(even if it's just a few pennies) into a simple game means someone won't be walking away happy. To me that is not fun. Another thing that bringing money into a game like this does, is ramp up the chance of arguements. This game already has a high chance of someone argueing about the wording of one card/room or another, throw the chance at winning money on that fire and real fights could break out. No, I would rather just play for fun. You can claim more solo victories than me, but in the end I still have a better track record with my friends along the way. Well at least in my opinion. If your style of play works for you and yours, more power to you. "A good friend will pick you up from the dungeon, a great friend will be there slaying the dragon with you and saying, Man is this fun!" |
|
01-20-2009, 07:59 AM | #17 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
When it comes to the strategic decision of attempting a shared win vs holding out for a solo win I have no bases to make that decision unless I quantify the two. In order for the game to remain competitive, every player should quantify the two by the same scale. Quote:
The point of the stakes is precisely to quantify shared vs solo wins, No one gets hurt or feels sore. Milord's stakes work just as well - the losers clean up. Nobody gets sore, and everyone knows a shared win (in that scenario) reaps the same reward as a solo win. |
||
01-20-2009, 10:28 AM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Green Bay, Wismunchkin
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
YAWN. :-O'
__________________
"In this life now you kill your you die, or you die and you kill. " - The Governor. Last edited by Quaff_fu; 01-20-2009 at 10:53 AM. |
|
01-20-2009, 10:59 AM | #19 | |
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
|
|
01-20-2009, 11:17 AM | #20 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Macungie, PA
|
Re: Strategies
Quote:
|
|
|
|