Game involving dropping objects into a container

I was considering randomly choosing a pentomino, but I figured there would be less strategy.

I figured it would be important that all pieces have the same volume. That would make no one piece intrinsically more difficult than any other piece.

I'm open to ideas, though.

ACG

If they're of different sizes, you'd have to randomize which piece is chosen. Once the pile gets high, no one will want to choose the pieces which will be too big at that point. Different shapes would be cool though -- that's why I'm thinking pentominos. But stars and other shapes would be fine -- if they all have the same volume.

I wonder what would happen if the pieces were kind of squishy. You wouldn't be able to shake the box that much, but dropping one pieces on the other *could* compress the pile.

ACG

Drat -- you're right.

However, this is a 3-D version of it. I'm almost tempted to suggest it to them...

ACG

No portion of the piece being dropped may extend below the line before it is released. I don't want people to just stick their hands in there -- too easy. The limit line is going to be halfway up the box, so there's room to pack all the pieces in for cleaning up yet there's space for a piece to fall.

I was debating a cylinder, but in that case there's too much symmetry -- there aren't any little corners and nooks you can sneak pieces into. If there were a cheap way to do it, I'd have wanted some kind of bizarre-looking container!

That's a very good point. However, here's the way I see it. The more pieces you put in, the more points you get if you're the last person to successfully drop a piece. In the basic game, there are 96 cubic units of pieces in total. If you get all the pieces but one in before you overflow, the last player to play a piece gets (say) 100 extra points. All the pieces but two gives you 25. All the pieces plus three gives you 10. The number of points you get by "winning" a round depends on the number of pieces put in there. You get 1000 or some astronomical sum if you manage to get all of them in (in the basic game there are between 96-100 units below the limit line). The point is: if you want to get lots of pieces in to get the bonus, you'll have to close-pack the middle as well. That will keep the midgame interesting.

This will require a rules change: randomized play. The players roll a die to see who goes next. It also allows the players to score points along the way somehow -- so no one will be shut out. But randomized play can make things strategic as well. Suppose you have a choice of playing a piece in a place where you can guarantee no more pieces can be played. You get (say) a 25 point bonus that way. However, consider the following: if you're behind, you may want to play it in a place which leaves room for another piece and hope the randomized play lets you go again to place the final piece and get 100 points instead of 25!

A switch to a points system allows for other ways to score which will keep the midgame interesting (if you don't touch any pieces of that piece's color in a multicolored set you get a bonus, stuff like that)

Other features:

There's a solitaire version as well -- how many pieces can you put in? And the fact that it cleans up after itself is also kind of cool.

I'd say this has a lot going for it.

ACG

What about the following?

There are multiple lines on the box. As soon as the pile passes a line, the previous player gets one point. That way, the middle of the game will still have some excitement in it, and no one will be shut out during a round.

Perhaps instead of one point, the score will be the number of pieces placed since the last time a line was crossed. That will encourage close packing even further.

Pieces will be drawn out of a bag at random -- especially if there's a way to prevent "brailling" -- feeling for a piece you want. This can be prevented, however, by having little chips with a picture of each piece on it and drawing a chip.

ACG