The FormulaIt is calculated to be a percentage of the Fair Deal. Start at 100% and subtract the following values:
- 8% if the £250k is still in play
- 18% if the £250k was taken out in the previous round
- 8% for each non-£250k power 5 figure taken out in the previous round
- 8% for each hobo 5 figure still in play
But add the following values:
- 7% for each hobo 5 figure taken out in the previous round
In addition, to add some variance, a random integer between -3 and 7, inclusive. This is generated via random.org. Whatever is generated, that amount of percentage points is also added to the offer (e.g.., generating 7 means +7% to the percentage, and generating -3 means -3% to the percentage). I thought of this as a "random generosity factor".
Here is how each offer was made:
First offer- -8%: £250k still in play
- -8%: 1 non-£250k power 5 taken out in previous round
- -40%: 5 hobo 5 still in play
- +7%: random generosity factor
Sum: 51%
Total: £5,593.76, rounded to £5,500.
Second offer- -8%: £250k still in play
- -8%: 1 non-£250k power 5 taken out in previous round
- -32%: 4 hobo 5 still in play
- +7%: 1 hobo 5 taken out in previous round
- +7%: random generosity factor
Sum: 66%
Total: £7,322.03, rounded to £7,250.
Third offer- -8%: £250k still in play
- -16%: 2 hobo 5 still in play
- +14%: 2 hobo 5 taken out in previous round
- +4%: random generosity factor
Sum: 94%
Total: £16,365.56, rounded to £16,500.
Fourth offer- -8%: £250k still in play
- -8%: 1 non-£250k power 5 taken out in previous round
- -8%: 1 hobo 5 still in play
- 7%: 1 hobo 5 taken out in previous round
Sum: 89%
Total: £16,382.72, rounded to £16,500.
Fifth offer- -8%: £250k still in play
- -8%: 1 non-£250k power 5 taken out in previous round
- +7%: 1 hobo 5 taken out in previous round
- -2%: random generosity factor
Sum: 89%
Total: £15,834.80, rounded to £16,000.
Sixth offer- -18%: £250k taken out in previous round
- +2%: random generosity factor
Sum: 84%
Total: £249.33, rounded to £250.
I thought this system had some potential. However, I realized a key flaw before I posted the second round: The Fair Deal already takes the power 5 and hobo 5 figures into account, so by lowering for having the £250k or hobo 5 figures in play, I'm essentially hurting you twice. I think putting in some bonuses/penalties for what happened in the previous round has some potential, though. I can easily be wrong with that, but it's what I think.
===
Deal-Eye:Once again going all the way to the end, and incurring a LOSS if it were playing against daniel123 or JoelDavies, a WIN against American Coupon Boy and hogwild94, and a DRAW against everyone else!
At least this affirms that the final offers were better than the earlier offers.
===
Questions (plural, actually)I'm thinking of reneging on my "formula only" policy and personally inventing next week's offers. This can come off as being "unfair" since I "know the outcome", but I do that already when I play my own Deal games online because their offers are always horrific. I'll keep to what the offer I made upon seeing the board for the first time is. Does this sound fair, or should I either introduce a new formula or permit a guest banker to reign?
Secondly, certain people think that this would be more realistic if there were some negotiating between banker and player. I'm not fond of allowing for free negotiations due to how the offers are shared amongst all the players in live play. However, I'm toying with this idea I had that goes as such:
- Once per game, you can "negotiate" the banker by offering an amount you think the offer should be.
- If the banker "accepts" it, that will be your new personal offer. If the banker "rejects" it, your new personal offer will be the original offer minus 10%.
- Negotiating will take place via PM, to prevent players from using previous negotiations to their advantage. I might also want all Deal/No Deal decisions to be done by PM, but I like the activity in these threads.
The question is what constitutes the banker "accepting" an offer and what constitutes "rejecting" it. My idea is that I have a pre-determined figure that I'll call the "max negotiable offer". If your negotiated offer is higher than that, I'll reject it; otherwise, I'll accept it.
Again, this would be once per game, to prevent abuse of this system.
Does that sound fair? Should it be modified? Or is this too much of a twist that takes away from the "What would you really do?" theme? I'd appreciate feedback.
Week 3 starts Saturday night at 12 AM BST!