i see that some people have bet everything in the 1st round does that mean if i bet only 1 point, i cannot be eliminated since they have to bet zero points the 2nd round. b/c zero is lower than 1 and they have to bet soemthing.
Actually the players in the first round did not bet zero, they did not bet anything (which is different then having to bet zero) - if that helps!
So next round, there will be 2 players who HAVE to bet zero and will fall into the pond, so if you bet 1 or more - you should make it into round 3.
Of course they HIGHEST bid will recieve 500 bonus points in case you want to go for that.
Here is what I posted elsewhere that some people found helpful (rules with some examples!):
Here is a quick recap of the rules, and an example game:
Run around the Pond
1) All players start with 20,000 points.
2) During each round, you bet some of your points.
3) The player who uses the LEAST amount of points in the current round “falls into the pond” and is out of the game. If more then 1 player tie with the least amount, then both players will fall into the pond.
4) If a player has no points left, the next bet will be 0 – so making it most likely they will lose in the next round.
5) The player who uses the MOST points in the current round will receive a bonus of 500 points. If more then 1 players tie, no bonus will be given.
6) Since there are NO WEKKENDS, NO VACATIONS, NO HOLIDAYS – if a player does not make a bet before a round deadline, the same amount of points that was bet in the previous round will be used.
7) Every player who does not make the first move in the first round is automatically eliminated from the game.
8) The game is finished with either 1 player stays on the pond side (this player wins), or all players fall into the pond (nobody wins)
Example – 5 players enter a game:
Player A (20,000) – bet 5,000
Player B (20,000) – forgets to make first bet
Player C (20,000) – bet 17,000
Player D (20,000) – bet 20
Player E (20,000) – bet 50
In round 1, Player B is eliminated right away. Player D is also eliminated since he had the lowest bid. Player C received 500 bonus points for having highest bid
Player A (15,000) – (forgets to bet) – so last round bet of 5,000 used
Player C (3,500) – bets 1,000
Player E (19,500) – bets 5,000
In round 2, player C is eliminated since he had the lowest bid. Since both player A and player E had the highest bid, nobody gets the 500 bonus points
Player A (10,000) – bets 10,000
Player E (14,500) – bets 10,001
In round 3, player A is eliminated since he had the lowest bid. Player E is the last standing and is the winner!
But after the first round, is a player does not bet, it will use the same bet from previous round (or as much as possible if current point total is not as much as previous bet) - so even if they do not bet, the computer will this round automaticly bet 0 for them. :-)
I still don't see the point of having the zero point people continue on. I would imagine that a majority of rounds will have people fall to zero.. so that's many rounds of knowing you can get away with just betting one.. seems like it drags it out..
You know rod, I think you're right. The minimum bet should be one. It doesn't make sense to let someone with zero get an extra round out of it. Takes all the skill that there might be in this game out of it for any round that has someone with a score of zero. I didn't realize that was the case earlier and found out about it from reading this discussion board. Unfortunately for me, I'd already entered my bet (Higher than one) and there's no way to change it. I won't make that mistake again. I think everyone should get to take this turn over, or the rule should be changed to make the minimum bet one. If you have zero, you're in the water.
It won't be obvious that everyone will go for 1 point even if it would ensure going to the next round. Getting the 500 point bonus for highest bid will be valuable at the later stages of the game when there's less players and everyone has less points left.
Anyways, i also think that it's not a very good rule and just lenghtens the game unnecessarily.
I already run around the pond some dozend times and to be honest, this is the first time I see somebody to spend all his/her points in the first round. -- If I know that there will be at least one runner "standing" (i.e. with a 0 point move) I can certainly (and I personally will) give only 1 point and I'll stay dry. But as Kitty said, nobody is forced to give 1 point and I'm quite sure, there will be several reward hunters with much more points spended. Anyway, I think even if it "lenghtens the game unnecessarily", the game is much more shortened by the eliminating of 50+ (non)runners in the first round than lenghtened by this rule.
Btw, the "0 point move" is seen far less often than you can think after this (little bit strange) first round, I'd rather expect it (if even) near the finishing-line. Please note that a run with 200+ runners is something quite special, IMHO the ideal number of runners is 20-30.
"0 point moves" are made on every round someone gets eliminated. With so many players as we have now i guess this could mean 100 rounds (or more, depending on how often more than one player falls to the pond on same round) like that. I think that out of those rounds only ten (or so) last ones will be somewhat interesting.
Mad Monkey: AFAIK the game comes from Germany where it's (well) known as "Ostfriesisches Deichwandern". I played it first time as PBM years ago in a club in Vienna. The "zero point rule" is the only rule which we (me and a lot of comrade-in-run on a Czech discussion server where we played it for years) have added due the translation and testing. I can live with the rule, as I already said, I didn't see it executed much often, but of course it could be deleted (again). I think, both points of view (for or against it) can be defended.
I've googled now for the German version of rules and I've found several variation. I'd prefere the variant with the eliminating of more runners per round if there are lots of them on the route. 2 are eliminated by 10+ runners, 3 by 20+, 4 by 30+ and so on. Then it should be possible to run such HUGE runs without any time problems. (This game should be fun and I'm personally not sure if any game, which lasts for approximately one year, can be...)
Kitti: "0 point moves" are made on every round someone gets eliminated. - Nope, if somebody is eliminated, he/she is eliminated, he/she don't have "0 points", so this situation is really quite unusual.
Again (speaking for the 0 point rule): I've never seen it in the second round (i.e. all points spend in the first). It can be seen at the end with only few runners, but in the ending the rewards are quite important (or to avoid the opponent get the reward... :-)), so if I remember correctly (and I'm quite sure I do) this is the first move in all my runs where I can spend only 1 point. Let me enjoy it, please. :-)
Plus, it seems that even if you have eliminated all of the runners with zero points, there will always be someone with 1 point, or at least someone with the lowest point total, that anyone else can knowingly outbid....
After this round, whatdidyousay will have the lowest point total and everyone can out bid them with a bid of 9000.
Even though it gaurantees one more run, I doubt everyone will make the full 9000 point bid. It seems that to win this game will take more than simply outbiding the person with the lowest point total every run turn. If that were the case, then whomever has the highest total right now will ultimatly win. Anyone who wants to beat them will sometime have to make a bid lower than the person with the fewest points left.
Sure, I think that the game will last for about 150-180 rounds, so I'd not spend more than 30-50 points in a "normal" second round. The people on the top, who gave luckily 3 points in the first round, wouldn't probably repeat it, but the minimum bet could be somewhere between 10 and 30.
It seems like such a big run of people is some-what unique, and since many did/do not understand exactly how the game works yet - there is a lot of learning for the players.
I really don't see a purpose of the 0 point bid rule. Even in the later rounds, if a person has to bid 0 and get eleminiated - all it does is allow the remaining player to go after the 500 point bonus. Other then that, it is a wasted round. I would vote (next game) to just eliminated people with 0 points left instead of letting them bid next round.
I like for "unlimited players" games, the idea of eliminated multiply players for bigger sections. (2 lowest bids for games with 20+ players, 3 lowest bids for 30+ players, etc... 10 lowest bids for 100+ players)
Plus have "quick" games with limit of 10 or 20 or 30 players.
So Fencer, you talked about some-how making a rating out of this game. What sort of formula were you thinking about using? Or are there other people out there with ideas? I also like the idea to have some sort of rating/ranking/stats for the game.
My point is BBW, that even if you eliminate the zero runners, you will still have the runners with 1 point left that everyone can out bid, or at least someone with the "lowest" total points left that everyone can outbid, so it really doesnt matter.
It seems with so many people who are new to this game, there will always be someone who bids their whole point total, just because they dont understand what is going on yet. I think most furue games will have more experienced players, and this problem will not exist.