Thursday, March 22, 2012

Proposal: Accessible Ansible

Times out and fails, 7-7

Adminned at 24 Mar 2012 16:26:50 UTC

Add a new Institution:

The Ansible: The Ansible’s Completion is tracked in this rule: it is currently 0% complete. When specifying a Direction to the Ansible, a Player may include with that Direction an Order of CONSTRUCT or DISMANTLE. If a Player Influences the Ansible with an Order of CONSTRUCT, its Completion is increased by N%, where N is the number of Marines this Player Directed to the Ansible this Cycle. If a Player Influences the Ansible with an Order of DISMANTLE, its Completion is decreased by N%, where N is the number of Marines this Player Directed to the Ansible this Cycle. If ever the Ansible’s Completion is higher than 100%, it is immediately set to 100% instead; if ever it is lower than 0%, it is immediately set to 0% instead.

Reword rule “The End” to:

If the Ansible is 100% complete, any Player may broadcast a Transmission by posting a blog entry announcing this, with ‘Ansible Transmission’ in the title. Then, if the author of the Transmission had never broadcasted before, and if a Player has more Councilmen than every other Player, that Player gains one tenth of the total amount of Power owned by all other players combined.

If the Ansible has broadcast a Transmission in the previous 24 hours and a single Player has more Power than every other Player, then that Player has achieved victory.

Similar to http://blognomic.com/archive/sensible_ansible/ but with a few fixes:
- any Player may broadcast a Transmission, not only the one who has the most Councilmen
- no more problems with percentages, at the wording’s cost
- replaced “to a maximum of 100%” with “If it’s higher than 100%, it is set to 100% instead”

Comments

Murphy:

03-23-2012 01:04:32 UTC

against still has a disconnect between “any Player may broadcast a Transmission” and “If the Ansible has broadcast a Transmission”. Also, 100 marines seems excessive, how about starting it at 50% and altering it by 5N% each time?

Patrick:

03-23-2012 01:08:04 UTC

I still maintain that it would be better to influence the ansible with only councilmen, or perhaps the marines would raise it by N% each time and the councilmen would raise it by 5N% each time. against

Cpt_Koen:

03-23-2012 01:17:54 UTC

Though Players may broadcast Transmissions, those are defined by a blog post with “Ansible Transmissions” in its title, so I guess it’s pretty safe to assume that Transmissions are Ansible Transmissions, and thus that everytime a Player broadcast a Transmission, that Transmission is broadcast by the Ansible.

Anyway, this is the kind of issue that would need a fix proposal, rather than an against vote.

As for the slowness, remember it was the same in ais523’s recent Mob Dynasty, with the Police Vigilance Number starting at 1 and having to go up to 200 to end the game. A way to speed things up was added later.

Bucky:

03-23-2012 01:56:42 UTC

imperial

southpointingchariot:

03-23-2012 02:54:02 UTC

imperial

omd:

03-23-2012 04:18:16 UTC

against

Kevan: HE/HIM

03-23-2012 07:47:30 UTC

for I don’t know if people are being misled by the idea of “protosals” and getting every rule right first time, but “this proposal would be better if X” is a reason to vote FOR and to propose your idea, in a game of Nomic, not to vote against.

ChronosPhaenon:

03-23-2012 09:12:21 UTC

for

southpointingchariot:

03-23-2012 14:23:02 UTC

against

Clucky: HE/HIM

03-23-2012 16:47:04 UTC

for

Klisz:

03-24-2012 16:12:51 UTC

for

Soviet Brendon:

03-24-2012 18:59:09 UTC

imperial

Yonah:

03-24-2012 20:58:47 UTC

for

Josh: HE/HIM

03-24-2012 22:56:59 UTC

for

scshunt:

03-24-2012 23:05:25 UTC

against