Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 30  All

Author Topic: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): liopoil's turn  (Read 68790 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1325
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #450 on: March 30, 2014, 05:38:04 pm »

Motion to suspend fails - it needed an 8-3 vote in favour, and there are already 4 votes against.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #451 on: March 30, 2014, 09:31:10 pm »

The reason for secret bidding is it bothers me having the thread cluttered with bids.  Are there other ideas about how to structure it?  If I'm the only one who doesn't like it, then I'll have to deal with it.

I thought it would be too much in one rule to suggest classes in the second one, but I certainly can.  While the rule doesn't "do" anything, it does create more of a focus.  The units cannot be buildings, for example.  Having units with attributes allows us to create opportunities for faster or slower movement, skills, or specialized roles.  Having units that represent groups creates an avenue for growth that doesn't cause more expansion on the board.  Being specific that units are people also sets the stage for training.  If they are soldiers, then they gain skill with training.  If they are farmers, they produce more food.

Since the motion didn't pass, I will revise the second one.
Logged

Voltaire

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 957
  • flavor text
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #452 on: March 30, 2014, 10:08:30 pm »

I think, if that's what you want to do, just propose that. If it needs to be separate rules (to cover all of that), then suspend the "1 per turn" rule.

To those who voted against the motion to suspend because you think we should change the rules if we want multiple rules/turn,  :( >:( :P :-\ :'( The system, in my mind, is working as designed. One rule per turn, unless they're related/necessary, or the person makes a compelling argument for doing two separate things. I like this check very much. I would have voted yes on the suspension.
Logged

Jimmmmm

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1762
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jimmmmm
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #453 on: March 30, 2014, 10:25:10 pm »

I think, if that's what you want to do, just propose that. If it needs to be separate rules (to cover all of that), then suspend the "1 per turn" rule.

To those who voted against the motion to suspend because you think we should change the rules if we want multiple rules/turn,  :( >:( :P :-\ :'( The system, in my mind, is working as designed. One rule per turn, unless they're related/necessary, or the person makes a compelling argument for doing two separate things. I like this check very much. I would have voted yes on the suspension.

How can you have an issue with people voting against the motion to suspend and also say the system is working as designed?
Logged

Voltaire

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 957
  • flavor text
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #454 on: March 30, 2014, 10:26:30 pm »

Honestly I was mostly replying to sudgy.
Logged

Jimmmmm

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1762
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jimmmmm
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #455 on: March 30, 2014, 10:31:12 pm »

I agree with sudgy.
Logged

Voltaire

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 957
  • flavor text
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #456 on: March 30, 2014, 10:41:34 pm »

Well that's your right.  :(
Logged

Jimmmmm

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1762
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jimmmmm
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #457 on: March 30, 2014, 10:41:51 pm »

Well that's your right.  :(

Thanks. :)
Logged

florrat

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
  • Shuffle iT Username: florrat
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #458 on: March 31, 2014, 02:34:54 am »

The reason for secret bidding is it bothers me having the thread cluttered with bids.  Are there other ideas about how to structure it?  If I'm the only one who doesn't like it, then I'll have to deal with it.
I don't think that the thread will be cluttered by bids. At least, not more than currently by votes, and I have never felt that the thread was too cluttered with votes.

One rule per turn, unless they're related/necessary, or the person makes a compelling argument for doing two separate things.
I agree, but IMO none of those conditions were satisfied. Also, I will almost always vote "yes" for multiple rule proposals if the proposals are administrative fixes. Doing those are just less compelling, so we'd better do as much as possible of those per turn.
Logged

florrat

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
  • Shuffle iT Username: florrat
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #459 on: March 31, 2014, 07:35:23 pm »

It's been your turn for almost 3 days now, so maybe propose a second draft or your final rule?
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #460 on: March 31, 2014, 09:40:38 pm »

I was hoping for more feedback, ideas from the group.  And time was needed for the motion to be voted.  I don't think I have been unreasonably slow.


Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #461 on: March 31, 2014, 09:50:38 pm »

2nd Draft Proposal #360:
Units represent people.  There are initially two classes of units: soldiers and farmers.   A unit can be placed undefined, or defined at the time of placement.  Each unit can have a number of different attributes, such as skill, tools, driving a vehicle. The starting attributes will be level of skill and speed, starting at level 0.  Assignment to a class costs N$5 and 1 IP and raising skill and speed would each be N$25 and 1 IP.  Raised attributes take effect immediately, so they can be raised and used in the same turn.  All units at level 1 speed can move 2 spaces per turn.  Farmer units at level 1 skill get double proximity points.  Other players' units cannot move into proximity with a level 1 skill soldier.
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #462 on: March 31, 2014, 09:55:54 pm »

2nd Draft Proposal #360 addendum:
Attribute levels cannot be increased at the time of placement.  Assigning a unit to a class when placing means the placement costs 2 IP total.

create unit at E13

place treasure chest at D13
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #463 on: March 31, 2014, 11:08:18 pm »

2nd Draft Proposal #360:
Units represent people.  There are initially two classes of units: soldiers and farmers.   A unit can be placed undefined, or defined at the time of placement.  Each unit can have a number of different attributes, such as skill, tools, driving a vehicle. The starting attributes will be level of skill and speed, starting at level 0.  Assignment to a class costs N$5 and 1 IP and raising skill and speed would each be N$25 and 1 IP.  Raised attributes take effect immediately, so they can be raised and used in the same turn.  All units at level 1 speed can move 2 spaces per turn.  Farmer units at level 1 skill get double proximity points.  Other players' units cannot move into proximity with a level 1 skill soldier.
um why wouldn't you want anyone to move into proximity?

or is this with a later attacking idea?
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #464 on: March 31, 2014, 11:08:31 pm »

2nd Draft Proposal #360 addendum:
Attribute levels cannot be increased at the time of placement.  Assigning a unit to a class when placing means the placement costs 2 IP total.

create unit at E13

place treasure chest at D13

Roll a die!
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

florrat

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
  • Shuffle iT Username: florrat
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #465 on: March 31, 2014, 11:42:06 pm »

I was hoping for more feedback, ideas from the group.  And time was needed for the motion to be voted.  I don't think I have been unreasonably slow.
Maybe I was a bit too hasty. You're right, you were not unreasonably slow. But I was waiting for another draft before I comment again.

---

About the new draft: it's not precise enough. I don't understand everything you want the rule to do, and there are details missing (see below). On top of that, being a soldier means you won't get proximity points from others (but surely it's useful to obstruct movement/grab treasure chests, so I like the idea), which might be a problem. Also, IMO you're still trying to do too much for one rule: adding two classes with unique features, adding two attributes, which you can raise, and which have certain effects. I'd prefer seeing one thing done well than multiple done not-so-well, so I'd advise you to just focus on either classes or skills.

-With "A unit can be placed undefined, or defined at the time of placement." do you mean that when placing a unit you can determine which class it has? With the addendum this seems superfluous: just let them first place the unit and then give it a class.
-When can I assign a class/raise skill and how do I specify that I want to do that?
-Can I change class?
-If I'm not at exactly level 1 speed/skill, then what?
-"Moving into proximity" means moving to an adjacent tile? What if I'm already adjacent to you?
-...
Logged

Voltaire

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 957
  • flavor text
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #466 on: April 01, 2014, 04:14:17 pm »

2nd Draft Proposal #360 addendum:
Attribute levels cannot be increased at the time of placement.  Assigning a unit to a class when placing means the placement costs 2 IP total.

create unit at E13

place treasure chest at D13

Roll a die!

Yeah, this is needed for the treasure chest.
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #467 on: April 01, 2014, 09:44:09 pm »

This dice roll may have been tampered with!
1d200
« Last Edit: April 01, 2014, 09:45:13 pm by EFHW »
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #468 on: April 01, 2014, 09:46:00 pm »

Rolled 1d200 : 190, total 190
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #469 on: April 01, 2014, 09:52:47 pm »

I'll put the final proposal up in the morning.  A bit more discussion would be nice!

Florrat, first too little, now it's too much!  Can rules have subdivisions?
Logged

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #470 on: April 02, 2014, 12:14:48 pm »

I couldn't simplify to just classes or just attributes because the classes don't mean anything without attributes, and only units with classes can have attributes!

Final Proposal #360:
Units represent people.  Each unit can have one class and any number of attributes.  Attributes and classes are defined by rules, and should be capitalized.

Classes.  A unit can be placed without a class, or assigned to a class at the time of placement.  Each class has unique abilities.  Assigning a unit to a class costs 1 IP and can be done at any point in the player's turn by posting in bold Assign Unit at ## to X class.  Units can change class, but they lose all their attributes.  Units of different classes are identical when all attributes are at level 0.

This rule defines the classes Farmer and Soldier.  Their special abilities could be reflected in attributes such as skill, productivity, tools, etc.  Farmers are represented on the map by a block "F" in the player's color.  Soldiers are represented on the map by a block "S" in the player's color.

Attributes.   Attributes give units new abilities or increase existing abilities.  Some attributes affect all units the same way, others give abilities specialized to the unit's class.  A unit needs to belong to a class in order to be assigned attributes.  All attributes start at level 0.  Abilities at each level depend on the attribute.  To raise an attribute up a level costs N$25 and 1 IP and can be ordered at any point in the player's turn by posting in bold Unit at ##: Raise X [attribute] to level Y [the next level].  Pay N$25.  Raised attributes take effect immediately, so they can be raised and used in the same turn, including the turn they are placed.  However, any given attribute can only be raised one level per turn per unit. 

This rule defines the attribute Speed (abbreviation Sp.).  Units at level 0 Speed move one space a turn.  All units at level 1 Speed can move 2 spaces per turn, at level 2, 3 spaces per turn, and so forth.  This attribute is currently the same for all classes.

This rule also defines the attribute Skill (abbreviation Sk.).  For Skill, the abilities associated with each level depend on the class of the unit.  Other players' units cannot move into proximity with Soldiers at level 1 skill.  Units that are already adjacent at the time of the attribute raise are not affected until they wish to move to a new square.  Farmers at Skill level 1 get double proximity points. 

Attributes are represented on the map under the unit symbol by small print abbreviations followed by the relevant level.  For example, Sp 1, Sk 2.   
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1325
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #471 on: April 02, 2014, 01:54:33 pm »

Vote: Yes on proposal 360
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #472 on: April 02, 2014, 02:02:21 pm »

Vote: Yes on proposal 360
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #473 on: April 02, 2014, 02:04:08 pm »

While I don't like rules saying what things should look like on the map (that map isn't a part of the game, it just helps), I'll still Vote: Yes on proposal 360.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

florrat

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
  • Shuffle iT Username: florrat
    • View Profile
Re: f.ds Nomic 1 (Thread 3): EFHW's turn
« Reply #474 on: April 02, 2014, 07:09:58 pm »

Florrat, first too little, now it's too much!  Can rules have subdivisions?
Good point. I might be too picky on how much a rule must do. In my opinion, a rule must do "1 thing", which is certainly a vague notion, but IMO your first rule did 0 things, and your second draft did multiple. I like your final version better, since you made more connections between abilities and classes.

IMO, you did the final version really well. I like how you can change classes, but that it does cost you pretty much. The speed restriction might be a bit harsh, though, but it might be fine. With all things we can consider giving more IPs to players (for example my  suggestion earlier to be able to pay N$ for more IPs).

Just to be clear: suppose I'm a soldier at C5, and another unit is at D5. Then that unit cannot move to C6, right?

Vote: Yes on proposal 360

(hmm... why did I do that? If this vote fails I can pick up $190...)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 30  All
 

Page created in 0.115 seconds with 20 queries.