Re: Wow, lots of proposals

by Le Roc at 2006-05-14 13:31:02

To respond to your thoughts. Unless I'm mistaken the previous games have all been won by someone exploiting a rule which "forgot" to say that you couldn't select a negative number. I included fractions (though I'm not sure how you could exploit these) and the repeating an action many times (max 10 repetitions) since they seemed to all be the most liable ways to create a "instant win" rule. If you think 10 repetitions is too restrictive feel free to suggest a less restrictive option. Frankly, I thought the $+/- 10 000 rule might be to restrictive but in the past we have not had very expensive things to purchase (a few hundred dollars if memory serves), well no big purchases that weren't also simultaneously winning the game. Anyways, if you want to write a rule that allows for a person to break any of these restrictions in a single case you can simply state that your rule takes precedence over this one. I don't have a problem with that, but then we will all get a little more warning. That's the point of this rule make it more difficult to win. I'm sure someone will find a way around this rule too, thats the point of this game.
In general I'm hoping to make a game that requires designing a game winning rule that creates a scenario where you are the only one whom can take advantage of your rule OR a game that is won in a long term scenario rather then instantly. If you don't like it, simply vote against it, or suggest a modification I'm happy to retract and repost if I think your ideas are worth-wild.