Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #59
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest       Sunday, April 5 1998       Volume 03 : Number 059

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 04:21:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC -- Eleusis game

I have a couple of comments. First, you might like to give the player
calling the game a choice of which Deck to use. There are two types of
legal Decks currently, and some players might not like the bigger Eleusis
Deck.

i also think it is possible to adpat this to email and make it less turn
based. I am specifically thinking of some ideas I RFCd a long time ago
about this matter, such as run splits - allowing both the current player
and the next player to submit a move and if they are both correct, the
Dealer may split the run, provided that a certain maximum number of runs
has not been reached. When there is more than one run , then the turn of
the next player may start, where an open position is a position that
follows a card that has been responded to by the Dealer.
A further enhancment I considered once was overthrowing the Dealer if e
does not respond in time, and there is a Prophet, and then the Prophet
becomes Dealer for the rest of the round (or until e perform a similar
transgression)

Now, these are all just ideas, and you may feel they complicate the game
too much - I think they can add a lot of fun and interest.

I also recall a player commenting back then that he knew a variant with no
pernalty cards and no Prophets. I think Prophets are a fun element, and
penalty cards can be done away with, without losing anything, if you don't
have a correct play, then you don't discard a card.

 Niccolo Flychuck

ps- Where do you thing there is an implication that players can only gain
points in subGames? 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 05:58:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT Traub <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC -- Eleusis game

>I have a couple of comments. First, you might like to give the player
>calling the game a choice of which Deck to use. There are two types of
>legal Decks currently, and some players might not like the bigger Eleusis
>Deck.

*Nod* this is a reasonable change, though normally Eleusis is played with
2 normal decks.  I liked the larger eleusis deck because it was
fundamenatally just two larger decks with suits renamed.  By allowing the
'suit ordering' you could effectively end up with two normal decks and
thus drop back to the standard rules although the deck size remains equally
large.  I think the larger deck is required since you need at least 4*14
cards in order to play (Having played in smaller games, they don't tend to
be as interesting as having at least 4 players in addition to the God/Dealer)

>i also think it is possible to adpat this to email and make it less turn
>based. I am specifically thinking of some ideas I RFCd a long time ago
>about this matter, such as run splits - allowing both the current player
>and the next player to submit a move and if they are both correct, the
>Dealer may split the run, provided that a certain maximum number of runs
>has not been reached. When there is more than one run , then the turn of
>the next player may start, where an open position is a position that
>follows a card that has been responded to by the Dealer.
>A further enhancment I considered once was overthrowing the Dealer if e
>does not respond in time, and there is a Prophet, and then the Prophet
>becomes Dealer for the rest of the round (or until e perform a similar
>transgression)

The problem with the run split (if I understand what you mean) is that
until you know whether the previous card is correct, you cannot know
what a valid next card to play is unless you already believe you know
the rule which isn't a valid assumption at any point in the game.
Since correct card to play can *only* depend on the previous correctly
played cards.
Overthrowing the dealer only works if someone else knows the 'rule' that
the dealer started with.  The prophet is never 100% sure to know the rule.

>Now, these are all just ideas, and you may feel they complicate the game
>too much - I think they can add a lot of fun and interest.
>
>I also recall a player commenting back then that he knew a variant with no
>pernalty cards and no Prophets. I think Prophets are a fun element, and
>penalty cards can be done away with, without losing anything, if you don't
>have a correct play, then you don't discard a card.

I've never heard of a version of Eleusis which didn't use the prophet or
penalty cards.  If someone could point me to the rules, I'd be happy
to look into them.

>ps- Where do you thing there is an implication that players can only gain
>points in subGames? 

I retract that statement, rereading 1250.1, IV, d specfically allows
subtraction of points from a player as long as it doesn't add or subtract
more than 8 points per instance.  However, based on Alfvaens comments, I'll
probably drop that clause from the proposed rules.

Thanks for your comments,

- --JT

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 07:23:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT Traub <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: RFC - Eleusis take 2.

I've reworked this quite a bit based on the feedback of Alfvaen and
Nicollo Flychuck.  I'd like people to give this version a look over
and comment if they feel there are still changes that need to be
addressed.  I will incorporate any feedback that is useful and helpful
and submit this for vote on Tuesday most likely (to give time for
feedback to be submitted)

Thanks again for your input, and should this eventually get made into
a rule, look for me to start a game of it pretty much immediately :)

- --JT

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

{{[ This is being submitted as a rule so that it can define a new type of
    trophy.  Otherwise I would have just made a Games Submission for it ]}}

Amend rule 1250.2 with the following to define a new type of trophy
   C.  The Scientist's Handbook is a nameless entity.

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Create a new rule with the following text:

[ This describes a minor adaptation of the game commonly known as Eleusis.
  The standard rules for this game can be found at
           http://www.netaxs.com/people/nerp/eleusis0.html
  The rules below are an adaptation to work within the framework of
  Ackanomic and email. ]

{{[ I wish to thank Alfvaen and Niccolo Flychuck for their comments, some
    of which have been integrated into this text]}}

1) General Equipment
   a) This game uses either one Eleusis Deck with the optional Wild cards
      or two Standard decks combined into one larger deck, again with
      optional Wild cards.
   b) Gamepoints as needed.

2) Number of players.
   a) This game is played with 5-8 players and one optional Referee.
   b) This game can have an optional Referee as defined in section 10.
   c) New players may *not* join during the run of an existing game except
      as defined under section 8.

3) How to start an instance of the game
   As described in rule 1250.1, section VI. 

4) General Rules of the game
   a) If there is a Referee, the Referee assigns a cardinal number from 1
      to N, where N is the number of players, to each player.  If there is
      no Referee, then the player calling the game shall be cardinal number
      1 and all other players shall be assigned a number from 2 to N where
      N is the total number of players including the player who called the
      game.
   b) Player number 1 shall be named the Deus for the first round.
   c) All player other than Deus are considered to be Scientists for that
      round.
   d) The round is played as specified in section 5.
   e) At the end of a round, the next higher numbered player is named the
      new Deus and a new round begins.
   f) The game ends when each player has been Deus exactly once, and the
      game is scored as described in section 7.

5) The play of a round
   a) Deus creates a private rule which specifies how a valid play is to
      be determined.  This rule may only depend upon cards which have
      already been correctly played, not upon incorrectly played cards, or
      the contents of any players hand.
   b) Deus announces publicly which of the two decks is being used for
      that round, whether the Wild cards are included in the deck.  The
      ranking of the cards [IE, the order of importance of the cards within
      the suits], the value of any cards which are different than their
      standard face value [IE all face cards are 10 or J=11, Q=12, K=13],
      the ranking and value of suits if that is pertinent, and the
      ranking/value of wild cards if they are in use.
   c) Deus (or the Referee) privately communicates to each player their
      hand of 14 starting cards.
   d) Deus (or the Referee) publicly communicates the face-up starter
      card.
   e) The round is now open for play and play proceeds in numerical order
      starting with the player in numerical order after the Deus for the
      current round
   f) The current player chooses a series of between 1 and 4 cards from
      their hand and announces them in the order they wish to play them.
      The player may also choose a call of 'No Play' if they believe no
      card in their current hand is a valid card to play in the current
      sequence.  A sequence of cards is only correct if every card in the
      sequence in order is correct.   If the player doesn't publicly
      submit a play within 3 days of it becoming their turn, they will be
      deemed to have played 'No Play' and Deus (or the Referee) will reveal
      their cards.
   g) Upon calling 'No Play' the player must reveal at that time all the
      cards head in their hand.
   h) If there is currently no prophet, and the current player has not
      already been prophet this round and there are more than two remaining
      Scientists the player may declare themselves prophet regardless of
      whether their play was correct or incorrect.  To save time, the player
      should include this declaration with their play.  The card played when
      a prophet is declared is marked with a '!'.
   i) If there is a prophet:
      1) The prophet publicly decrees whether the play is correct or not.
      2) The Deus publicly declares whether they approve of the prophets
         call or not.
      3) If the Deus doesn't approve of the prophets call then the
         Scientist who played the card(s) is not penalized, the prophet is
         dealt 5 penalty cards by the Deus or the Referee, and resumes play
         as a Scientist.
      4) If the Deus approves of the prophets call and the player played
         an incorrect sequence, then the Deus (or Referee) deals the player
         2 cards for each card in the sequence or five cards if the
         incorrect call was 'No Play'.  In the case of 'No Play' the
         prophet must choose a card from the current players hand before
         the penalty cards are dealt that would have been a correct play
         and play it.  If the prophet chooses a card that isn't correct at
         this point then the card is returned to the players hand, and the
         player receives no penalty cards, instead causing the prophet to
         be overturned as in part 3 above.  If the round is in 'sudden
         death' then the current player is expelled from the round after
         the dealing of the penalty cards.
      5) If the play of 'No Play' was deemed correct then the player will
         be privately dealt a new hand of cards with four fewer cards than
         in their previous hand.
   j) If there is no prophet, Deus judges the play as correct or not with
      the penalties to the player being the same as in step 'i' part 4
      above.  In the case of 'No Play' Deus must choose a correct card
      from the calling players hand and play it.  If the Deus judges a
      'No Play' call to be correct, then the effect of step 'i' part 5
      above occurs.
   k) If there is no prophet, mark every 10th card played with a '*'.
      After forty cards, the round enters 'sudden death'.
   l) If there is a prophet, mark every 10th card since they became the
      prophet with a '!'.  After 30 cards (3 '!') the round enters
      sudden death.
   m) If the current player has 0 cards or there are no Scientists left,
      then the round is over and is scored as in section 6.
   n) The player next in numerical order becomes the current player.
      The player after the highest numbered player is player 1.
   o) If the current player is either the prophet or Deus, go to step 'n'.
   p) go to step 'f'

6) Scoring a round
   a) A player is considered the 'True Prophet' if they were the prophet
      when the round ended.
   b) The high-count is the largest number of cards in any players
      hand (prophet included).  Call this number H.
   c) Every player except Deus gets Gamepoints equal to H - the number
      of cards in their hand.
   d) Any player with 0 cards gets 4 Gamepoints as a bonus.
   e) The 'True Prophet' gains 1 Gamepoint for each correct play and 2
      Gamepoints for each incorrect play after they became prophet.
   f) Deus gains Gamepoints equal to the smaller of
      1) the highest players score
      2) twice the total number of cards played since the true prophet
         became prophet.

7) Scoring the game
   After all rounds are completed, the winner is the player with the most
   Gamepoints.  All other players are ranked in descending order by
   Gamepoints.
   Let N be the number of players in the game.
   The highest ranked player gains a trophy, "The Scientist's Handbook"
   and 2(N-1) points.  Each player in decreasing order gets two less points
   than the preceding player.  If two players have the same number of
   game points but the next lower player with a different number of game
   points recieves points as if they weren't tied.  Last place will score
   0 points.  [Frex. in a game of 5 players with final game points of 20,
   14 8, 8 and 4, the players would recieve in order 8, 6, 4, 4 and 0
   points]

8) Joining and Leaving the game.
   Any player who leaves the game or goes on vacation without appointing
   a substitute causes the game to pause.  When the game is paused, any
   other player of Ackanomic who is not already a player in that game of
   Eleusis may volunteer to fill in, assuming the missing players
   Gamepoints and game position.  If the Deus leaves the game or vacations
   without appointing a substitute and there is a Referee, Deus must pass
   the private rule on to the Referee and the round continues without
   pausing the game.  If there is no Referee, then the round will end and
   players will be scored as if the round had ended normally (except no one
   gets the bonus for 0 cards).  If the Deus appoints a substitute, then 
   he passes the private rule on to that substitute and play proceeds
   normally.  If no substitute for the Deus was named, the game is paused
   after the current round is scored until a new player joins.

9) Duties of Deus and the Prophet
   The Deus and Prophet are necessary for the game to proceed smoothly and
   so are encouraged to respond to plays as quickly as possible.  It is
   unfortunately not possible to impose a 3 day timeout on Deus, however
   if the Prophet fails to respond to a move within 3 days then that player
   is removed as a prophet as if they had made an incorrect call on a play.
   If there is no Referee, the Deus for each round assumes the
   responsibilities of the Referee.

10) Duties of the Referee
    The Referee (or Deus for each round if there is no Referee) must track
    the game state including which player has which cards, must simulate
    shuffling the cards at the start of a round and dealing cards as demanded
    by the round.   They must also post the current game state including all
    played cards with a reasonable amount of frequency (at least once every
    other day would be recommended, and after each players play would be
    best).  If there is an actual Referee, that player is paid $A10 when
    the game is concluded for providing their services.

{{ renumber this rule to 1250.23 }}

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 16:28:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT Traub <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Re Eleusis RFC.

I realized this morning that I forgot to build in an error handling system
as was suggested by Alfvaen.  If you take my previous RFC (dated Sunday Apr
5) and perform the following actions, you will end up with my current draft
for the Eleusis proposal

- --JT
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert the following section after Section 1, part d and renumber the current
parts e and f to f and g respectively.
   e) At the end of the round, the Deus from the previous round will
      announce the rule from that round, and all other players have a 3
      day period to announce an error in the game play.  Play on the
      next round can proceed during this error determination since the
      results of one round do not affect the next round.  If at least
      one player declared there to be an error, handle it as in Section
      11.

Add the following section 11) after Section 10.
11) Handling of errors.
    a) If a player believes there to have been an error, then if there is
       a Referee, the Referee decides if the error in fact occurred.  Otherwise
       a vote among the current players occurs.  The voting period lasts 3
       days and a player who doesn't respond is considered to have voted 'No'
       meaning that there was no error.  If all votes are in before the 3 day
       period, then the voting period ends immediately.
    b) If there was a vote, and a majority of the players voted that 'Yes'
       there was an error, then there was an error.
    c) If there was an error, Deus for the round which contained the error
       loses 20 Gamepoints.
    d) If there is more than one error in a round, the Deus is only
       penalized once.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 17:12:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Human Heads Quote

On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> > > I'll have to look through my collection of HUMAN HEADS!
> > You wouldn't happen to know Emperor Cartagia, would you?
> 
> No; anyone else know where my quote(above)is from?

perhaps "I, Claudius" ?
Niccolo Flychuck

> 
> 
> - --
> - --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
> Current Album--Simple Minds:Real To Real Cacophony
> Current Book--Jo Clayton:Quester's Endgame
> If a Stealth craft crashes in a forest, does it make a sound?
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 20:39:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Hubert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 558 & RFC

On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> I would also note (although this is not part of the CFJ proper) that the
> election part of Rule 950 is seriously flawed.  It states an election will
> take place, but does not vacate the seats beforehand.  Therefore,
> regardless of the result of the election, unless the DeeJay voluntarily
> vacates eir office, there will be 0 vacant Seats, and hence no new DeeJay
> will be elected.

HA HA HA!!!  You'll never be rid of me!

*Sigh*.  Well, if this is the only glitch in that Rule, so much the
better.  Once the Election is well under way, I'll step down so that the
winner can take over.  In the meantime, I'll stick around for a while in
case anyone else wants to play anything once "Only the Good" dies down.
(As is, the ASS will be silent, again, once that song is over.)

Also, (and thus begins the RFC section of this post) what would you beings
think of a kind of song-association game to be played on the ASS?  It
wouldn't necessarily be under the G&C aegis; I think it may be too
easy for that. But it runs something like the following: The DeeJay begins
and referees, and starts by naming a certain theme for the game (e.g.
"things that are cold")  The players, in turn, must each play a song
(ASS fees would probably be waived for the duration of the game, but the
players would have to congregate in the Library) that relates somehow not
only to the theme but to the previous song as well.  They'd be required to
provide name, author/performer, and hopefully lyrics to the song so the
DeeJay can decide whether a link is valid or not.  For example, given the
above theme, I could begin with Foreigner's "Cold as Ice." Then the next
player would go with something relating to the theme and to the current
song, hopefully as esoterically as possible.  It could be as simple as
"Let It Snow, Let It Snow, Let It Snow" or related perhaps by artist (go
to "Hot-Blooded,") and so on.

I got the idea from a mind-stretching warm-up we use in improvisational
theater.  It's incredibly fun, but part of the fun (and the difficulty)
involved there is the frantic immediacy of having to think of a song in
the space of a second or two, which would be lost over e-mail.  (Not to
mention being able to sing it yourself, which would also be lost unless
we want to attach .wav files...)  So if you other Ackans like the idea,
perhaps you could toss up some suggestions as to how to make it more
difficult and relevant to PBEM.  If you don't like the idea, please let me
know that also.  Obviously, this concept is still very much in its
infancy, and many changes can be made.

- -Hubert

Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have. 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 20:49:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Hubert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: actions

On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, Ian K. wrote:

> > > > I am filing an IP against Alfvaen, with intent to remove him from the
> > > > Office of Praetor.
> > > 
> > > I vote against this impeachment.
> > > 
> > Whereas I am voting in favor of it.
> 
> For symmetry's sake I will also vote for this Impeachment. It's getting
> old, but it may still be amusing...

For sanity's sake I point out that it is unnecessary to vote _against_ an
Impeachment unless half of all active players have already voted YES...

Has an IP ever been accepted?

- -Hubert

Windows 95: another fine product of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation... 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 20:55:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 159 (TRUE)

> "CFCJs should be used for 3 things, IMO: harf, strategy, and remedial
> action against cheaters.  I'm not sure they are appropriate for
> honest mistakes.  Indeed, the initiator did not ask for much in terms
> of penalization, but clogging the justice system with this and having
> the defendant enshrined in the CFCJ archives is enough penalty; any
> further token penalization would be petty."
>
> Next, his appeal reasoning for CFCJ 148:
>
> "I certainly do not understand how this new stand on crime
> is "harfy", and why players need to go to Gaol for making
> honest mistakes."
>
> I agree with Malenkai's thoughts here. Harfing the game is not easy and we
> all ought to be grateful to all those who do it. Not having sufficient time
> to continue with this is hardly a crime (well, it is in the Acka sense of the
> word, but you know what I mean). It's not as if rufus was maliciously
> refusing to publish the results. Using Malenkai's criteria, this is not
> harfy, I can't see any strategy in it and it wasn't as if rufus was cheating.
>
> Actual Penalty:
> A deduction of 0 points from rufus' score.

I had intended to retract this when it was distributed (since just after I sent
this I received rufus's apology/resignation), however, the court has
unfortunately outpaced me :/

The intention was just to give em a bit of a nudge....

As for strategy (while this was _not_ my intention ): It appears this has had an
effect by rule 611.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 22:04:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Human Heads Quote

> > > > I'll have to look through my collection of HUMAN HEADS!
> > > You wouldn't happen to know Emperor Cartagia, would you?

> > No; anyone else know where my quote(above)is from?

> perhaps "I, Claudius" ?
> Niccolo Flychuck

Well, since nobody seems to have gotten it, or even be particularly
close(and I don't feel like making it into a Treasure or anything),
I'll mention that it's from Spike Jones's version of "My Old Flame".

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--Indigo Girls
Current Book--Sean Stewart:The Night Watch
Ring!  Ring!  Time to pick up the Clue Phone!

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 22:04:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Re Eleusis RFC.

> Add the following section 11) after Section 10.
> 11) Handling of errors.
>     a) If a player believes there to have been an error, then if there is
>        a Referee, the Referee decides if the error in fact occurred.  Otherwise
>        a vote among the current players occurs.  The voting period lasts 3
>        days and a player who doesn't respond is considered to have voted 'No'
>        meaning that there was no error.  If all votes are in before the 3 day
>        period, then the voting period ends immediately.

This should be phrased to take advantage of the Hearing rule, since that's
what it is, essentially.  Who should be Hearing Harfer for it I don't know,
but it should be someone in the game, at least...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--Indigo Girls
Current Book--Sean Stewart:The Night Watch
All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.

------------------------------

End of acka-research-digest V3 #59
**********************************