Tuesday, June 18, 2019

Details Details

I have little interest in present dynasty, however, I’d like to point to the unlawful taking of two Civic titles by Derrick, as I understand current rules and conditions. I also note a certain lack of an ‘if and only if’ clause which seems rather against the spirit of the game to abuse, unless you guys enjoy trifling with technicalities. (Unspecified location for now, unless you’re curious.)

Comments

Kevan: City he/him

18-06-2019 20:27:18 UTC

What do you mean - that Derrick didn’t meet the criteria for two Titles at the time of taking them, or that it was illegal to take two at once? If the former, which ones?

BlogNomic’s mood shifts as players swap in and out, but I think technical trifles generally aren’t enjoyed much these days.

TyGuy6:

19-06-2019 00:08:10 UTC

I meant that, unless I’m missing something, Farsight has Derrick beat for State of the Art, and tied for The Cube. Nobody should get The Cube now unless they hit 5x5 first.

TyGuy6:

19-06-2019 00:25:17 UTC

Also, upon review, the IF clauses in the ruleset are clearly meant as IFF clauses in several cases, so nevermind on that score. I’ll focus on dynastic rules for any of my trickster-style urges from now on. (Which are generally benign, I might add.)

derrick: he/him

19-06-2019 01:39:47 UTC

Read carefully. We don’t usually play language games, but we do like to be precise about scoring conditions. The Cube measures area, which means that a 6x3 is larger than a 4x4, which in the case we are talking about are the relevant sizes.

Farsight now beats Me for state of the art, but that’s because my place was declared unsafe. Before that I think its fairly clear I had more modules than him.

TyGuy6:

19-06-2019 02:56:06 UTC

Ah, yes, rectangles. Well, that one I missed.

Small detail again, (it’s quibbling in hindsight,) but as I first read the rules quarters couldn’t maintain themselves, making your ratio ever so slightly imperfect at the time of take. (The lower left Q was only adjacent a q.) But, surely, the more natural interpretation is valid as well. Forgive me, and carry on!

Kevan: City he/him

19-06-2019 07:52:56 UTC

The Quarters thing seems a very fair reading - “A module connected to a quarters is “Maintained”.” is entirely plain, and there’s no way to read the rule to suggest that a Quarters is connected to itself. (If it leads to a corridor that leads back to itself, it’s fine, but a Quarters blocked in by other Modules is unmaintained.)

Looking at it, I think it should have been mine: at the time of the previous Drop closure Derrick had one unmaintained Module, Farsight had one (the Quarters at the very bottom), naught had four, pokes had one and I had zero. Since I’m still within the time window to claim it, I will.

Kevan: City he/him

19-06-2019 07:53:46 UTC

(I will of course lose it immediately, next round.)