Author Topic: Rules flaws, etc... (Read 33486 times)

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #30 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:24:15 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'209167\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 06:21 PM\']
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'209156\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 05:32 PM\']It makes me wonder if there was some rule in place on Super Millionaire if a player had their 50:50 and Double Dip at the same time, particularly on the $10M question.[/quote]I hope not. If you can answer 14 questions without using those two lifelines, knowing that you were risking hundreds of thousands of dollars (and later millions) each time, bully for you. Show the question, cut two wrong answers, invoke Double Dip, pop the confetti bomb. You've earned it.
[/quote]
Absolutely agreed.

Jeremy Nelson · « **Reply #31 on:** February 28, 2009, 10:38:59 PM »

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' post=\'209048\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 02:54 AM\']
All the versions of High Rollers had a flaw that stuck out like a sore thumb, it would lead to an automatic gane over. That being if a player leaves a 1 on the board, game ends right then & there though it's more common in the Big Numbers round than the main game. That's why it's always a good idea to discard the 1 as quickly as possible to avoid that flaw.
[/quote]
In the bonus, at least, if there was a 9 and a 1 remaining, couldn't they just as easily have called the 9 a bad roll instead?

[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'209068\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 09:58 AM\']
Name That Tune, the winner in the golden medley plays for the car regardless how much they win in earlier rounds.[/quote]
Do most British game shows have some sort of prize ladder? I always wondered because most shows here play the bonus for a flat prize, and the above "flawed rule" is considered regular fare.

Gus · « **Reply #32 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:10:34 PM »

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' post=\'209048\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 02:54 AM\']That's why it's always a good idea to discard the 1 as quickly as possible to avoid that flaw.[/quote]
That makes it strategic, not flawed.

[quote name=\'rollercoaster87\' post=\'209175\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 09:38 PM\']In the bonus, at least, if there was a 9 and a 1 remaining, couldn't they just as easily have called the 9 a bad roll instead?[/quote]
They could, but rolling a 9 would at least earn you another hundred bucks, even if it meant game over.

JakeT · « **Reply #33 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:33:15 PM »

[quote name=\'rollercoaster87\' post=\'209175\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 09:38 PM\']
In the bonus, at least, if there was a 9 and a 1 remaining, couldn't they just as easily have called the 9 a bad roll instead?
[/quote]

But how would that make any sense whatsoever? The "1" left on the board isn't simply called a "bad" roll for arbitrary reasons...since the player must always roll both dice in each and every turn, the combined total on both dice will always be a 2 or greater. You can't roll a "1" on one dice and a "0" on the other so really, a "1" isn't simply a bad roll, it is an impossible roll.

If a "9" and a "1" were remaining on the board, either in the main game or the bonus, how would it be possible to call the "9" a bad roll when there are two combinations totalling 9 that could be rolled (3 & 6 or 5 & 4)...also, with "9" & "1" remaining on the board, there is still the roll of a 10 (6 & 4 or 5 & 5) that would remove them both, clearing the board.

Is it just me and did I miss something here with this 9=bad roll concept? My brain kinda hurts...

Jake

TLEberle · « **Reply #34 on:** March 01, 2009, 12:22:05 AM »

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'209049\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 01:20 AM\']How is that really a flaw?[/quote]It isn't. And actually, many of the items listed aren't flaws. There are some stupid rules, for sure, but not a flaw. A flaw is something that makes the game unworkable, like having the champion go first in every round of Wordplay. The "round four Triple" thing was annoying and rendered the first three questions on Family Feud all practice rounds, but both families knew that round four was the one to win. I didn't like that the second player didn't have a chance to tie after a three-joker win, but it's the rules of the game.

Some real flaws:
The betting round of Chain Reaction, where teams saw their chances of winning slip away with every wrong guess, and further so because the betting was capped at $500 per turn.

The three-question final round on the early episodes of Sale of the Century.

Control reverting to the player with the last correct answer on Joker's Wild 1990. Some contestants were able to keep control of the game only because the opponent was unable to jump-in and steal.

And the rule on Name That Tune where you were able to buzz in at any time, say "It's The Armpit Song!" and the opponent didn't get to hear any more of the tune.

goongas · « **Reply #35 on:** March 01, 2009, 02:20:46 AM »

You could of used 50/50 and double dip on the same question on Super Millionaire. I read that Michael Davies were intrigued by the possibility, although it never happened. The possibility of using the double dip after the 50/50 turned the 50/50 from the worst lifeline of the original three to the best lifeline, in my opinion.

Craig Karlberg · « **Reply #36 on:** March 01, 2009, 04:05:01 AM »

I guess the 1 in the High Rollers situation was more a nussance than a flaw. But if there are other numbers left along with the 1, than it's good strategy to knock it out quickly.

As for the 50/50 & DD, when you reach the $10M level, it's very easy to exploit the 50/50 by using that first & then the Double Dip, thereby creating instant riches. It never hhappened, but if there was an online version of Super Millionaire, it would be fun to try to exploit the 50/50 at the final level.

chad1m · « **Reply #37 on:** March 01, 2009, 04:17:51 AM »

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' post=\'209202\' date=\'Mar 1 2009, 04:05 AM\']when you reach the $10M level, it's very easy[/quote]...right.

CarShark · « **Reply #38 on:** March 01, 2009, 03:31:28 PM »

I think this one might fall more under the heading of "bad hosting" rather than "flaw", but I didn't like that the number of words played in Speedword in the second round (in the Cross-Sprint-Cross-Sprint-Bonus format) was so dependent on how gabby Chuck Woolery felt that day.

mbclev · « **Reply #39 on:** March 01, 2009, 04:03:18 PM »

On MDP, I don't like the rule where the clue giver must wait for a response from their partner before giving the next clue. Likewise, I don't like when the responder only can give one response per clue. On the Password Plus and Super Password bonus rounds, you didn't have such restrictions (although on P+, you'd often hear the responder say "Clue" before the clue giver said the next clue in the bonus round [shades of Stumpers!]).

TLEberle · « **Reply #40 on:** March 01, 2009, 04:06:54 PM »

[quote name=\'mbclev\' post=\'209239\' date=\'Mar 1 2009, 01:03 PM\'](although on P+, you'd often hear the responder say "Clue" before the clue giver said the next clue in the bonus round.[/quote]Because the clue giver had to wait for a response. If you didn't have to wait for an answer by the guesser, you could just string together a sentence. That's not Password.

chad1m · « **Reply #41 on:** March 01, 2009, 04:32:23 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'209240\' date=\'Mar 1 2009, 04:06 PM\']Because the clue giver had to wait for a response.[/quote]I don't think that's entirely accurate. I've seen plenty of bonus round trips on P+/SP where the celebrity just takes a pause and gives another clue, instead of waiting for a response. That's evidenced here and here.

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'209014\' date=\'Feb 27 2009, 07:57 PM\']Well, as I'm sure at least one poster here can attest to (paging Chad Mosher...), the huge flaw concerning celebrity partner selection for the bonus round on MDP. It really didn't seem fair to base the selection solely on points scored with the partners, especially since many games ended prematurely, forcing some otherwise great champs to play with a mediocre (or downright awful) partner in the bonus round.[/quote]Your support is appreciated.

davidhammett · « **Reply #42 on:** March 01, 2009, 05:00:55 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'209059\' date=\'Feb 28 2009, 10:43 AM\']
As far as the bonus round is concerned, it's not really a flaw of the game for the '1' to be left alone, but a combination of (mostly) bad luck and (maybe) bad strategy.
[/quote]
You could also argue that, in many cases, the contestant's leaving the "1" could have been the best (s)he could have done. Regardless of the decisions of which numbers to remove when, the only way that the player can win is if the numbers on the rolls of the dice total to 45 (1+2+3+...+9)... it's a necessary (but not sufficient) requirement. Thus, if the player leaves the "1," that means the dice rolls to that point have totaled 44... meaning the contestant is screwed no matter what, so to end up with $800 is the best possible outcome. It's certainly possible the player's game could end sooner based on their choices of what to remove coupled with the dice outcomes, but when the rolls total 44, it's impossible to win.

Of course, there are often exceptions caused by rolling doubles. When I talk about the dice rolls adding up to 45, I'm referring to the dice rolls that are "used." We've all seen dice rolls that were bad, but because of insurance markers the game continued. Had a different choice been made earlier of which number(s) to eliminate, perhaps that roll wouldn't have been bad; that is, a different roll would have been counted as "used." In other words, here the contestant's endgame outcome is potentially more dependent on the choices they make; one choice might lead to a set of "used" rolls that adds to 45, while another could add to 44 (or something else, for that matter).

clemon79 · « **Reply #43 on:** March 01, 2009, 05:07:29 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'209240\' date=\'Mar 1 2009, 01:06 PM\']
Because the clue giver had to wait for a response. If you didn't have to wait for an answer by the guesser, you could just string together a sentence. That's not Password.[/quote]
No, they didn't. There were lots of times where a clue was followed by a blank stare, then followed by another clue. Now, if I have a partner who is going to be patient and wait for me to guess when I've got nothin', I'm going to say "clue" as a way of saying "get on with it, give me another one."

Yes, you could string together a sentence or multi-word phrase if you wanted to, provided you spaced them out such that they appeared to be single-word clues. And if you did that, 1) you'd be wasting time, and 2) you very likely wouldn't be asked back as a celebrity guest.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #44 on:** March 01, 2009, 05:10:21 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'209254\' date=\'Mar 1 2009, 02:07 PM\']
Yes, you could string together a sentence or multi-word phrase if you wanted to, provided you spaced them out such that they appeared to be single-word clues. And if you did that, 1) you'd be wasting time, and 2) you very likely wouldn't be asked back as a celebrity guest.
[/quote]
3) You'd be playing an entirely different game than your partner was playing, and you'd go down in flames. (Possibly what you entailed with #1)

Author Topic: Rules flaws, etc... (Read 33486 times)

CarShark