Gamblers

[Kuroaitou]

Woot! I won! And thanks guys - for once, I actually win at something on this forum... ^^;

On a sidenote - yeah, there are some flaws with this game in regards to the gambling scheme, but ultimately you could do a - first three people to get 300 or more win type or ordeal. That way, more points for the 'Master of Games' are distributed evenly. Or, you could do it in such a way that if there are N people that have the same highest total score (i.e. - 10 people with 100), only half of them get the points, while the other half fall off.

...hmm. This is a bit trickier than I thought. ^^;

EDIT: Btw, <3 to Root. Honestly, I'm kind of sad you didn't win since it was you that basically orchestrated the plot, but I'm glad that you did this. Yay for points.

[RootRanger]

For those wondering, it was me who had 4 people bid 100 in order to assure that one of us wins. So, for everyone upset that they were out immediately for not picking 100, you have me to thank.

You can also thank me for making the game unplayable without major changes by revealing how to beat it.

I'm pretty much a hometown hero right now.

[plastiqe]

Except you lost, Root.  : P

Congratulations Kuroaitou the Master of Games!

[Elbirn]

Every highest score means no one will bet 100.
So no one will bet 99.
So no one will bet 98.
So no one will bet 97.
So on.

See where I'm going?

Why yes, yes I do.
While that's how it would play out in theory, I doubt that's how it would work in practice. However, a better solution could probably be found regardless.

[RootRanger]

Except you lost, Root.  : P

[Helston]

If there's more than one survivor with the highest score, split the points between them. If three people choose 100 one is eliminated and the other two receive 50. If two people choose 100, one is eliminated and one gets 100. Non-winning scores are unaffected.

[Annele]

Why not just kill everyone with the highest score? Then it wouldn't be about RNG, it would be about mind games.

[Kuroaitou]

Why not just kill everyone with the highest score? Then it wouldn't be about RNG, it would be about mind games.

Everyone chooses 1 - everyone dies.

[whatifidogetcaught?]

Why not just kill everyone with the highest score? Then it wouldn't be about RNG, it would be about mind games.

Everyone chooses 1 - everyone dies.

*implosion*

I like Helston's suggestion the best. Get some freaky decimal numbers up in here.

[Regyptic]

Why not just kill everyone with the highest score? Then it wouldn't be about RNG, it would be about mind games.

Everyone chooses 1 - everyone dies.

How about a system where the highest score goes out if more than one person chooses it and not if it's unique. Then there's still an incentive to go for 100's but it becomes a much bigger risk.

Wouldn't this solve the everyone-chooses-1/everyone-chooses-100 problems?

[Vineroz]

Why not just kill everyone with the highest score? Then it wouldn't be about RNG, it would be about mind games.

Everyone chooses 1 - everyone dies.

Don't think that would happen. Gamblers don't simply submit "1".

[eaglgenes101]

How about we break highest-submission ties by killing all with the highest submission? That would create more risk of betting high.