Okay, so, as far as I know 4 of us are okay with playing for money. I'm going to post one possibility for a payout system (we can do it all through PayPal), but I'm not proposing it as my final recommendation or anything like that. It's just one idea, and ultimately we should probably vote on what our pay scale should be (and if we want to do one at all).
So here's my initial idea. The numbers are just how much each person will get or will pay at the end:
1st - $100
2nd - $25
3rd - $0
4th - $10
5th - $17.50
6th - $25
7th - $32.50
8th - $40
9 comments:
I'd rather "redistribute the wealth" a little more evenly than that. You should get something for 3rd. Maybe
50
30
20
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
Alternatively, it could be a flat fee for all but the top 3.
I think the flat fee kind of defeats the purpose of the fee at all. If you are in 5th, you aren't going to care much about improving your team. That said, I prefer your setup to Luke's, prize money wise. Another option is that we could base it by points off the leader. That way, if you have a truly epic stink bomb of a season (Spencer!) you pay more. Where as if there is a really tight pack 1st to 4th, and you lose by 3 points, you don't pay as much. That could be more complicated, though.
I think a sliding scale is a shitty way to do it. It is much more complicated and I honestly don't think it will do anything to reign in dump trades. I don't want financial incentives for this year to be conflicting with improving a team overall. Maybe a slight penalty for finishing dead last, but other than that, I don't like the idea.
Just realized that I forgot to put negative signs before the numbers for 4th-8th places....but I think you guys figured out what I meant anyway.
I don't really care about preventing dump trades, I just think a sliding scale is fair. I like the idea of there being something to play for 'til the end, even if it's small, when 1st place is out of reach.
I like Caleb's suggestion better than mine.
and while it may not totally prevent dump trades, I think it'd be nice to have some disincentive to trade half of your team for one keeper, which I always found really annoying.
Whatever people want, I am indifferent about. I don't think it will affect the way people play. Are you really going to care if you owe $10 vs $20 or if you owe $25 vs $30? My experience is that unless you make the prizes high, collecting all the money is more trouble than it is worth.
Mark has a pretty good point. I don't think cash prizes at the level we'll be willing to play for are going to make much, if any, of a difference, and prize collection is tricky and sometimes never happens. Can anyone come up with good non-monetary prizes or punishments? Those could be more fun, if well done, and would probably be easier to deal with.
Post a Comment