Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk

Jan-3-2006 16:27

Hi,

I want to give everybody fair warning. There will be two rule changes that effect agency favors and treasure hunts made in the next few days:

1) Detectives will lose any favor that they are holding when they join an agency. That is, if they have a favor available to them that they have not yet started, it will no longer be available after joining the agency.

2) Detectives will not be allowed to join an agency if they are currently working on a favor. They will be required to finish or quit that favor before accepting the invitation.

This is intended to cut down on the advantage that large super agencies (competitive agencies with sattelite non-competitive agencies) have over smaller agencies when competing for treasure hunts.

This change will probably go into effect on Thursday or Friday.

If you have any questions or comments about the need for this rule change, please post them here.

Jan-4-2006 16:32

I'll agree.

I've been a huge supporter of the "smaller agency" treasure hunts, in which we can't compete.


As for affording time/money and asking for password...
Time is a key. No agency can be expected to win without an input of time. Money isn't hugely required to win a hunt. And I don't think any agency asks for passwords. It seems to be voluntary in them all.

It seems that there are simply a few people against it, and there is no lying that it isn't cheating. Frankly, I don't see how it bothers anyone. Either you are a competitive agency and you get hunts, or you are laid back and get one every once in a while.

Jan-4-2006 17:00

Reda! I know what thread you are talking about! It was one of the first large discussion I ever tried to participate in!! :D

http://newyork.hypoware.com/map/cityhall/post.spy?id=2389

Jan-4-2006 17:01

Although we are a big agency, our main problem is that our detectives are from around the world. We are never on at the same time. So this new rule, alhtough I didn't know it was already happening, will help us.

However, i am in favor of changing the treasure hunts so that only big agencys can do some, and small others. However, there could be a gray area as to what big is and what small is. Which could cause more problems.

Jan-4-2006 17:26

Rach, that is what Mojo is trying to accomplish now. We have managed to recruit several very good new detectives from all over the globe. That way when I am sleeping someone I trust with my password can be up and work the hunt for me.

I aggree with Jojo in that it is not money that allows bigger agencies to compete better in hunts. It is better management. You need to be organized and committed if you want to be an active agency and chase after hunts.

Hunting is not what every agency is about, nor should it be the end all of being in an agency. The key is to have fun and enjoy, this is a game. That is what we look for when recruiting for Mojo; we want good people that are fun to interact with and are good detectives.

I have read over some of the smaller agency thread and I think that there are just too many variables on what makes a small versus large agency to really have a good opinion on if that would work better.

One more thought on this after reading over the earlier referenced threads. This seems to come up after a break of some kind. It looks like school is out between Christmas and New Years, and someone gets frustrated watching an agency suck up a bunch of hunts during that time. Complaints flare up. Then school goes back in session and every thing evens out again.

I look at the top agencies now, what has stopped them from continueing to grow? Because everything goes in cycles. They were big and strong, now others are moving up. Later others that are not in existance now will rise even further.

Sleuth is a very addicting and fun game, hopefully we will continue to attact lots of new people who will come up with ideas we have not even dreamed of yet.

Jan-4-2006 17:35

If there were to be a big/small agency seperation, I would think that age, fame, and amount of members would be factors.

Age, of course, would determine experience as an agency. Fame would be the major factor, seeing as it really reflects the growth and prosperity of an agency, and member count would mean that more favors are open, so that would put you as a bigger agency.


I think maybe we should have single city hunts for smaller agencies and multi-city for bigger agencies.

But I don't think these rules are really helping much. No matter what, the bigger agencies with more active and more, overall, members will win the hunts. You can't expect to win one if you are small and don't have highly active members.

Jan-4-2006 17:44

*is joining a small agency if the big agencies can only participate in multi's*

Jan-4-2006 18:08

LOL!

I'm tagging along...

Maybe 2 singles and 2 multi's for each at one time?

Jan-4-2006 18:27

I think people are missing the point here with trying to fudge around with the number of hunts allowed, or size of agencies allowed, etc.

Sleuth is a game to be played for fun. For the friendships and for enjoyment of solving the case.

The competitive side of things is something measured in points. Right now there is a top ten list of agencies (overall and per city) and fame points are the only thing that matters in that ranking.

If Ben (based on the input he gets here from the Sleuth community) thinks that there should be other ways of ranking agencies I am sure he will do it. There were lots of other suggestions made that Ben decided not to implement for his own reasons.

I will bring up a point I made before about there should be an overall listing for agencies, so we see the small ones start up and can welcome them. I will start a new thread along those lines.

This reply has been deleted by a Moderator

Jan-4-2006 20:56

*carefully edits her wayward thoughts that may have been more of an attack than an actual grown up conversation*

Ran, I don't really think this is about rankings as much as it is about what is ethical and allowable.

You are right; it is a game. And having fun should be the top priority. Part of playing a game is to come up with ways, within the guidelines that are set to gain an advantage, while working as a team. Agent rotation was never outside the rules set forth. There were two rules that governed agencies, besides the basic necessity of needing to be subscribed. Beyond that, working to advance position was a matter of strategy.

There are players and agencies that choose not to pass share or agent swap for their own personal and perceived integrity. I commend those who make that choice for sticking to their convictions. However, I do not think they have a right to be upset with those who choose to think outside the box, but within the rules when playing the game. IT IS A GAME. The object is to, yes, have fun, but also reach goals.

I have no issue with the rule change itself. I see it as one more twist to the game to work with and challenge strategy. I am a little disappointed in the way it came about. Mojo has worked hard, as a team, and gone through plenty of growing pains, just like any other agency, and has earned its position on the top five. My hat's off to Eye Spy. Thanks for keeping us on our toes! ;)

(And yes, I am addressing Mojo specifically for a reason. I think I deserve the opportunity to respond to accusations that may have been made against myself and fellow detectives.)

That said. I am finished with my rant and ready to put out a contract on one of the waiter’s friends or family members….