Subject: MN: Re: Sv: Token quantity discussions

From: "Wayper, Paul" <WayperP@p...>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 08:52:09 +1000

On Thursday, June 03, 1999 6:33 PM, kevan@d...
[SMTP:kevan@d...] wrote:
> > > Or, we could simply revert to the old version of the token collection
> > > table, which gave additional tokens for the higher numbers:
> > > I was never sure why we stopped using it, anyway...
> > 
> > Kevan repealed all the higher interchange bonuses
> 
> ...and at least half of you agreed with me enough to vote FOR, of
> course...

Sorry, Kevan - didn't mean to sound like I was accusing you or anything.
Just trying to be informative. You're absolutely right (although I didn't
vote for it. I think it was one of those weeks where I forgot to vote or
something).

> Well, as commented in other messages, a high LV is such a good thing
> already that it seems unfair to give further reward for it - not to
> discourage high velocities, merely to stop them giving Players a huge
> advantage over their slower neighbours. 
> 
> As for people getting huge numbers of Tokens in a single Turn; this is
> also something of an issue, although it wasn't the main thrust of my
> repeal. Gaining a large number Tokens per Turn means that you can
> perform a large number of Actions per Turn; if *everyone* can perform
> that many Actions then it just makes the game more intense and
> short-lived (fine, I suppose, for Ruttsborough, but not really the other
> variants), but since only the faster Players get the bonus, it makes
> them more likely to maintain their lead. 

True. This is why I thought it was a good idea to bring in timed moves - so
that people who make longer moves naturally get to make fewer Actions
(without spending a blue to extend their move). But this was shot down - I
think because people didn't like the fact that you had to pay on a sliding
scale for moving.

With this discussion in mind, would people accept a proposal to make more
complex Moves take more time? The "velocity = more distance in same time"
argument doesn't hold too much water in my opinion - LV is a convenient term
not a hard and fast rule. The only other real argument I can recall against
it was that it was too powerful; that can be edited down. What do people
think?

Consider: if the problem we're having here is that it's more beneficial to
move at high LVs, then we shouldn't stop people moving that fast - we should
be adding a downside to moving fast. Longer duration of Move is the best
solution I can see. If someone has a better one, then please state or
Propose it, but without that I think we're not dealing with the whole
problem.

> Didn't we discover that the large Token bonuses became quite unbalancing,
> during the week or two that we were using them? Memory fails me.

Not at all, IMNSHO. It takes four turns to get up to full 'speed', and even
then that's all lost if you get Shunted or do a Special Move. After the
bonuses above five were dropped, all I did was make sure that I moved
through five interchanges and no more. It didn't make me give up choosing
complicated routes or putting my LV above five. In this sense limiting the
bonuses had no effect. The problem is not moving far per se, the problem is
that moving further allows you to make too many Actions (because of the
increased token gains). I think the only reasonable way to limit this is to
make long moves take more time, thus giving you less time to Act.

So what do people think?

Paul Wayper -- DPI ITS Computer Systems Officer
_____________________________________________________________________
SigClean 1.5a prevents all errors in transcription, transmission, and
reception of eMail, destroys sig and email viruses, and stops flames.
Report all bugs to the author. SigClean is FreeWare. (c) 1998-9 PJW

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

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/l-nomic-d
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications

---

From: Jonathan David Amery <jda23@h...>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 02:27:48 +0100 (BST)

> it was that it was too powerful; that can be edited down. What do people

5 mins per line change?

-- 
Jonathan Amery. O speak to reassure me,
##### To hasten or control;
#######__o O speak, and make me listen,
#######'/ Thou Guardian of my soul. - J.E. Bode