If this Steerage Override change goes forward I’m going to propose another Facility closer to the original function. Probably better for this to make a completely new facility, in that case.

This appears to be excessively generous to me in particular.

well, you have been repairing me more than anyone else so far, so i’m inclined to reward that! :U

  It seems bizarre to wipe the repair log entirely. It’d be different if there was a check-mark to say if you’d been paid for it, but another thing for the whole log to be trivially deleted in a single action.

Agreed with SingularByte. If you’re wiping the Repair Log as a way of “remembering” who was paid out for repairs, then use another variable like “Paid” as part of each Repair Log entry.

Rather than wiping the Log, I meant to say.

y’all, we’re already swimming in variables!! i think a version of cashing in repairs that removes text from the gamestate tracking page is much more practical than an implentation that adds even more text and table columns, at this point :0

Then I’ll have to state it as openly as I can.

One of my agendas requires, in part, me to have a number of Repair Logs under some condition. One of these facilities lets anybody delete all of my progress in a single action with no real cost.

One of my agendas requires, in part, me to ensure that the facility has enough power to do so at all times, thereby always leaving the option open to delete said progress. In addition, by using it to stop agenda 1, they also bring me further from completing this agenda too.

Agenda 3 is a dud, requiring me to essentially wait for people to stumble into completing it.

Please be careful about making proposals as an emperor that can knock a player out of the game, and throwing your weight behind it.

i’m communicating further about this with SingularByte in private; for everyone else’s information, rest assured, i am keeping players’ agendas in mind and being careful about them!! if you do think i’m trampling over your agenda, consider privately messaging me about it.

remember: “Machinists may never disclose, implicitly or explicitly, publicly or privately, their Agendas, except where explicitly required for the Declaration of Victory.”

[Lemon] Is that reminder a caution that you consider SingularByte’s statements of “One of my agendas requires, in part” to have broken that rule, or to be dangerously close to it?

My argument on whether it counts as an implicit disclosure is that the rule makes no say of whether revealing them in part is illegal, just the agenda itself (implicitly or otherwise). So long I don’t give enough information for anyone to know which one I’m referring to, I should be good.

Especially given that there’s a limited list of subjects that agendas can even be about in the first place.

for the pivot to the Great Machine now being “inclined to reward” certain actions retrospectively, and some sympathy for another player’s goals being seemingly trashed.

Also “Beadworks” is a better name.