Subject: MN: Re: Year 2 Week 45 Proposals

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@u...>
Date: 18 Mar 99 18:29:29 +0000

Week 45's Proposals included: 

> Proposal 647 - Time keeps on slippin'... [Multiple] 
Yes, a good thing well done. 

> Proposal 648 - Contracrostipunctus [Amendment] 
Cleaner wording than the current implementation. I do have one concern, 
though - 

> 3) Otherwise, the Move is known as a Standard Move. All Stations in the 
> Map currently under play (by default, the Map defined in Rule 1.17.1) are 
> Valid. The Player must then check through all the Rules and checks in the
> following list to determine if any one of them makes the Move Invalid. 
> Once the Move is Invalid, it cannot be revalidated by another Rule. 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

> 1. LV Checks 

> * If the distance between the target Station and the Player's 
> current Piece Location is not precisely the same as that Player's 
> LV, the Move becomes Invalid. 

These two points conflict somewhat, particularly where DH loops are 
concerned. 

Consider - Cryer decides to play Dollis Hill, when Rushton is at (say) 
Beckton. Rushton is required to play DH by the loop rules, and decides to 
tick off the points bearing in mind that final sentence from para (3) above 
that an invalidated move remains invalid. 

Since the first point is LV, and there is no way to have anough LV to 
travel from Beckton to Dollis Hill, and no subsequent point may revalidate 
an invalid Move, the required Move to the Hill must be immediately 
discarded as a possibility. Since the only other option is Pass, Rushton 
must remain at Beckton (and, incidentally, breaking the Loop). 

That doesn't seem right, but is it what you intended? This interpretation 
has its benefits (it's another way of forcing a pass) but it is profoundly 
at odds with existing play. 

> Proposal 650 - We Are Normal And We Want Our Freedom [Multiple] 

> 3. Conservation of Energy [Amendment] 

> In Rule 1.19.2 (Charge), replace "Charge is modified by normal Piece 
movement" 
> with "Charge is modified by any Piece movement that takes place during a 
> Player's Movement Phase" 

I was going to complain about this, but of course the wording excludes 
Straddles which is rather nicely done. 

I would have thought that applying this change would sufficiently fix the 
Charge win. 

> Proposal 651 - Electroplate Blues [Amendment] 

I'm a little sad about this - the Electroplating itself is a splendid idea, 
well worth using, but I'm terribly unhappy about losing the Charge win. 

Whilst I accept to a certain extent the point about the fiddliness of the 
maths, the whole point of introducing it was so that we had more than one 
way to win. It just seems a little sad to take that away, to my mind. 

> Proposal 652 - Through a Podume Darkly [Amendment] 
Very pleasing. 

-- 
Dunx 
IRL: Duncan Ellis, Senior Software Engineer, Business Modelers, Oracle 
<I work for Oracle, I don't speak for them>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/l-nomic-d
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com