Glad I never spent a dime on this site! Being able to buy 1st place is so not what competition in a game is about.

just some ramblings...
(i talked with john and cody about possible solutions. interesting conversations.)

one thing that irks me about bomb is that he figured out a way to get 1st without having to beat 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc... for most of the month (yes he did farm the shit outta a 10k on the last day of the month). but really shouldnt the 1st place of the month be able to say that he was better than everyone else for that month, not just that he avoided everyone else who posed a threat?

one way to fix that would be to enforce table maximums, i.e. if you have 20k points, you cant sit at a 500 table if there are 2.5k games being played.

but then that would hurt the social aspect of the game. what if you want to play with your friend, but you have 20k, and they have 1k?

can you have some tables be unrated, and then friends can play there?

there are a couple of possible endpoints:
1) make changes that result in clean competition so that people dont have to lower themselves to loopholes that the majority of the community finds offensive. how do you change the game to encourage/enforce less loophole chasing?
2) forget points altogether, and make the game a purely social game. this will drive away people who play for the competition. but what percentage of the kdice players are so uptight and care so much about competition (include me). i dunno, maybe ~10%? and these arent necessarily the best players for the community anyways. they stir up trouble, seem to always be searching for loopholes, and have the largest egos in kdice.

i dunno, it was fun listening to john and cody and what they were thinking.

First of all, I feel like changing last month's results would be wrong. What happened, happened. People utilized the tools at their disposal to win and there is nothing wrong with using legal tactics.

What should be done though, is a change in these rules. Obviously, the whole star system should remain in existence, as it partially funds the server, but there should be some rule changes to control how much and when a person can donate.

You should only be able to donate so many times a day, which limits the number of points you can pick up at any one point, so we don't have someone picking up 40,000 points all at once. Also, there should be a time in the month (several days before the end) when point buying is suspended and players are left to prove that they deserve their spot on the tables.

I suggest giving those who "bought" their place a choice: those stars by their avatar, or their final place on the leaderboard. They get to keep what's most important to them, but aren't doubly rewarded.

You had time the whole month to fix the bug, since it was discussed in the forums.
Dont change April rankings. Try to make May a better month.
Many proposals have been made: Leagues, Play-Offs, mandatory number of 10k games,...
Please give us your thoughts whenever a discussion like that pops up, so we know if its even worth talking about it.

taking out points all together, or having a separate set of 'just for fun' tables, sounds like a really, really good idea.

i've pretty much given up playing games altogether at the moment due to the amount of farming, flag-whining, flag-ninjaing, 'disrespect of flags', and generally everyone who only gives a damn about plus points.

kdice just isn't fun at the moment. points-free tables might just bring some of that fun back into it.

I went through al posts once again and have to agree with wichbone that most people are in favour of keeping the current April ranking.

It will always be a compromise and there is no solution that will please all for 100%. So it's just a matter of trying to get as close to an acceptable solution for all people concerned.

I had a chat with diceygirl and Bombardier yesterday and maybe DG should confirm it herself but I think she can live with 2nd. Bombardier sounded really honest last night and I am 95% sure he made the 1600+ effort himself. I think I found a way to check with 60-90% certainty wether or not bomb cheated or not and will send that proposal to Ryan.

Similar equal point stuff has been done before (in the other sense but still, it was also to fix things) so I was wondering if we couldn't close the April ranks by awarding Bombardier the same 116247 points as wishbone so both could share a gold medal?

But after that I propose we urgently focus on the upcoming May drama!

Here's an idea: Eliminate dominance, and only the person who finishes 1st gets points, everyone else (from 7th to 2nd) gets 0 points, and no-one gets negative points. This would eliminate 99% of ninjas, teams, flagging and whining, farming etc....and make the game more interesting too.

Also, make a suicide option....it's annoying having 3 territories with 1 dice each at the start of a game but not being able to quit because someone is sitting just one 6stack on one territory...although this would be less annoying with no dom.

Person with most Points Per Game wins.

DCWoody, it would make a nice extra kdice version. However only points for 1st would probably make at least 3 people give up very early because even if they truced they would never get 1st. Maybe they would do crazy stuff to 1st or help a friend because they had nothing to lose(no negative points). I agree it would create more incentive to go for 1st but it would be counterbalancedby much negative play.

still it would be a fun version for a few games a month. Maybe also give some points for 2nd and 3rd to reduce the negative side-effect?

re "one thing that irks me about bomb is that he figured out a way to get 1st without having to beat 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc... for most of the month (yes he did farm the shit outta a 10k on the last day of the month). but really shouldnt the 1st place of the month be able to say that he was better than everyone else for that month, not just that he avoided everyone else who posed a threat?" :

I've participated in sports tourneys where the gold medalist *seemed* to have an easy route to the top ... but only because most of the serious threats eliminated themselves in the other side of the DE bracket. Sometimes it shakes out that way.

Should those winners be penalized for "avoiding" their elite peers most of the day? I can't see why -- they've earned their final places through just as much hard work as anyone else in the event.