tl;dr

because the Most Requests metric is impossible for a late joiner (like me, incidentally) to hit if anyone else is trying for it.

Also you already get a cash bonus for being creative, so you’re doubly awarding those players.

@Clucky- it’s typically smarter to optimize funds by creating a small, simple construction (spend a little, earn a lot) than by competing for the bonus reward (spend a whole lot, earn back what you spent and then maybe a little bonus- or maybe not).  This would encourage minifigs to make more elaborate constructions at the cost of optimizing funds.

@Bucky- true, but late joiners can hit the other metrics.  Not unreasonable for one metric to reward the most faithful player.  The Bonus Rewards metric is quite obtainable—right now, no minifig has won more than two Bonus Rewards.  Anyone can catch that—it’s more accessible for a newcomer than the Funds metric is.

I’ll go out on a limb and support this mainly because of Subrincinators respond to Clucky.

That is the fault of Josh for giving large standard rewards and small bonus rewards, not the players who take advantage of his mistakes. I dislike doing anything that puts an additional reward on past actions and feel this is just a move by you to give yourself a better chance at winning because you’ve won a few challenges. So its a totally legit proposal on your behalf, I just a) would rather not have to win two rounds and b) don’t really like the rule change in the first place.

tl:dr but agreeing with clucky.

@ Clucky: the rule “Apex” did not exist until 4th January, well after you had developed a commanding lead in Funds.  It was the rule “Apex” that put an additional reward on past actions (Funds now contribute towards victory as well as towards brick acquisition).

My proposal does the same thing—it puts an additional reward on different past actions.

Because you have an insurmountable lead in Funds, it’s understandable that you want this to be the sole factor in getting a chance at victory.  But until two days ago, there was no reason to expect that amassing Funds would make a minifig more likely to win the dynasty.

If this proposal passes, I’d have a better chance at competing for victory, yes—but so would lots of others.  Example: if Winner’s Washington Monument wins Josh’s closed request, then Winner will be just behind me in that race, even though Winner is a brand-new player.  This rule would level the playing field a LOT.

PS what does tl;dr mean?

too long ; didn’t read

The difference is that funds have always been a statistic that is clearly important. Everything has been about earning funds, so you know funds are important. You complete requests to earn funds - don’t change the goals just because you havn’t been as good at earning funds as other players.

Funds are not clearly important relative to victory until they are clearly defined as important relative to victory.  They were obviously a goal in terms of getting more bricks to work with, but not obviously a goal in terms of achieving victory.  This change happened only two days ago.

And part of the point of a Nomic is, as I understand, to change the rules or even the goals.  I certainly get why the player with far and away the most funds wants funds to be the only method for achieving victory.  But to claim this was apparent before it was defined is a stretch, to say the least.

I mean yes, that is the point of nomic. There is nothing inherently wrong with you trying to change the rules in your favor. I greatly prefer your attempts to win here over the attempts of a lot of other new players because you’ve kept them within the rules of nomic rather than trying to exploit loopholes in the core ruleset or other devious moves. But its still nomic, and I’m still clearly going to try and make funds more important for winning.

You complete requests to earn funds, but you also complete requests to earn the bonus- and typically, competing for the bonus guarantees earning fewer funds than those who build only for maximization of funds.

BTW, if all requests had been given the reward promised, I’d be in second place re funds—hard to say I haven’t been “as good at earning funds as other players” besides Clucky themself.  Instead, I’ve had some bad luck.  If I do get that 150 back, then this proposal actually makes it harder for me to win and gives a greater chance to minifigs who are further behind re funds.

Clucky—

“But its still nomic, and I’m still clearly going to try and make funds more important for winning.”

I have absolutely no problem with that.  ;)

Explicit

Requesting a VETO in favor of Josh’s version

Oops, wrong proposal.  Ignore that last comment.

s/k to speed things up since this has clogged up the nomic for so long and has little chance of passing.  Now that I have a third bonus award, this proposal would give me too much of an advantage over other players.

I’d still like a rule change that allows other non-scamming paths to victory besides sheer acquisition of Funds, to keep the game competitive for all players until the very end.  But this proposal isn’t going to pass, and might not have the intended effect anyhow.  Sorry it’s slowed down the works for 40+ hours. 

Feel like doing some adminning, Darth?