We can't explain the universe, just describe it; and we don't know whether our theories are true, we just know they're not wrong. >Harald Lesch
Is it near (near as in within 5.000km) the southpole?
We can't explain the universe, just describe it; and we don't know whether our theories are true, we just know they're not wrong. >Harald Lesch
Is it near the equator? (this time 3,000km should count as near)
Edit 4: Hmm. Should I allow answerers to decide maximum questions per turn?
That. And similar stuff. Hell, if I were the topic creator, I wouldn't have much in the way of rules, just guidelines, following the philosophy of "Whatever the current answerer deems reasonable." xP
...
Is it a body of water?
None.
We can't explain the universe, just describe it; and we don't know whether our theories are true, we just know they're not wrong. >Harald Lesch
Now where would that
city be?
Does the name begin with a vowel?
None.
Now where would that city be?
Bah.
My memory sucks as of late.
And for some reason, I stopped double-checking everything I do a couple months ago.
D:
None.
Yes.
Already addressed.
Does the name begin with a vowel?
Sorry, I'm not gonna do wheel of fortune questions, as I said earlier.
Quote from name:Killer_Kow
Is it Atlantis?
No.
None.
ALL PRAISE YOUR SUPREME LORD CORBO
Is is Galapagos?
fuck you all
Tux, if you ever decide to have 'answerer' tell you what they're going to do ahead of time, then I suggest a new rule: the answerer gets points if they stump the questioners. I'd say 5 or 10 points. For the questioners to be considered 'stumped', a certain # of posts would have to go by since the answerer started their turn. I'd say about 125-150 posts. You might want to require the answerer to answer a certain # of questions per their posts if that's how you decide to determine 'stumpage'. ;b
I still haven't yet decided on the nature of answerers themselves just yet, though, so deciding on scoring rules for answerers may be a bit tricky. That is, I'm looking to decide on a way to handle the periods where answerers have to go offline and leave the game hanging. I'm gonna wait one more round before I decide whether to designate a group of answerers, allow multiple concurrent answerers with their own questions (ugh!), require I know the 'thing' each round so that I could be a backup answerer (though I'm trying to avoid things that count as 'babysitting'
), or something. I could use suggestions for that.
I also want to wait a few more rounds to decide on any "stumpage" rules. I'm not sure yet whether the goal for the answerers to necessarily stump the players would make the game fun or not, I mean. For instance, I could think of a few things that I'd almost be sure no one could guess, if stumping were expressly my goal. Cancel that.
Edit 1: I should add some constraints for answerer topics, though, to prevent easy stumping. For instance, I could just make up an imaginary character or pick an obscure species of bacteria or something stupid like that.
Edit 2: Updated rules 4 and 15.
Edit 3: On second thought, accommodating scoring for players who want to have 'fun' doesn't make sense in a competitive game. Scoring should be for merit. Hmm...
Edit 4: Scoring for post count would make it easier for me, but if a lot of dumb posts are occurring then it'll give the answerer free points. Though again, it is sorta a requirement for players to
want to be reasonable for the game to work properly, anyway...
Post has been edited 13 time(s), last time on May 17 2008, 4:45 am by Tuxedo-Templar.
None.
The more competitive the better, methinks.
Is it the Vatican? Sorry to be specific, but I just kept thinking of all sorts of country related questions. I want this out of the way.
None.
Sure you're up for competitive? Alrighty then!
Ok I have an idea. I'm gonna make it the answerer's job to tally up the total questions answered for me (not posts; there's too many factors for that). The questioners should try to be sure that the tally is accurate, too, so the answerers don't start getting extra points.
That seems like a good way to keep it relatively hands-free on my end. I'll decide on the answerer afk problem next round.
I'll update the scoring rules shortly.Edit: Now that I think about it, questioners who can just jump right into the game are not going to be heavily concerned about the competitive aspect. Answerers will get free points off of people who ask tons of questions; regardless of whether they're asking smart ones or not. Hmm...
Edit 2: Ok I'm afraid I'll need to wait a round or two to decide on scoring rules for answerers. I want to see how this game pans out for a bit, first. Just have fun for now.
Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on May 17 2008, 4:27 am by Tuxedo-Templar.
None.
Ok, I know what I'm going to do finally.
Let's finish this round up and I'll announce my new plan. This should work out well.
None.
Is it in the Western hemisphere?
None.
We can't explain the universe, just describe it; and we don't know whether our theories are true, we just know they're not wrong. >Harald Lesch
OK, we know the city must lie within the bright area I marked:
We should now try to narrow it down further.
Helpful questions would be population size of the city, start with >500.000,
if its on an island, and on which continent.
Think of more!
So, Dan, is the city marked on the above map? (can you find its name and place on the map?)
Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 17 2008, 10:30 am by NudeRaider.