Monday, March 19, 2012

DRAFT: Buffering

Append to rule “Institutions”:

Each Institution can be either Active or Inactive. Inactive Institutions are signed with a “*” mark after their names in this rule.

Whenever an Institution is created or modified, it becomes Inactive. When a new Cycle begins, all Institutions become Active.

In rule “Cycle Resolution”, change the text “When an Institution is resolved” to “When an Active Institution is resolved”

Add to rule “Cycle Resolution”, as its fourth paragraph, the text:

When an Inactive Institution is resolved, no player influences it.

Make all Institutions inactive.


Clucky: HE/HIM

03-19-2012 23:16:23 UTC

This sorta works. It kills off old Institutions though, so like if SPCs change to Legion passes then the old one can’t be used anymore. The problem here isn’t as bad, but you could have a user expecting trying to influence foo with a lot of the their resources, then foo gets taken away and the round ends before they can reallocate.


03-19-2012 23:20:20 UTC



03-19-2012 23:21:23 UTC

2.5 Cycle Resolution
“Then, players Restock. Each player earns 1 Credit for each Institution which they Directed Resources at but did not Influence that Cycle”

We’ll have the change this to “...each active institution which they…” else players will be able to direct resources at inactive institutions for a credit.


03-19-2012 23:21:52 UTC

I agree, but I think that people can be smart enough to see it coming, since the proposal changing the Institution will be pending for some time before being enacted and rendering it Inactive. So, caveat emptor, it’s your risk if you try to influence an Institution which is deemed to be changed.


03-19-2012 23:23:14 UTC

@Patrick, yes, people will be able to get 1 credit off inactive institutions. I don’t see that as a problem.


03-19-2012 23:58:01 UTC

Rather than changing modified Institutions to be Inactive, couldn’t we have some sort of list of pending changes to Institutions which only take place at the start of the next Cycle?


03-20-2012 00:17:33 UTC

@SlamCrackle, yes, but that would be more awkward to both write as a rule and to control later.


03-20-2012 01:08:07 UTC

When a Driver Drives an Active Institution, does it become Inactive? ;-)


03-20-2012 03:27:29 UTC



03-20-2012 12:23:50 UTC

What if every proposal which changed an Institution began with something similar to: ‘At the start of the next Cycle following the passing of this proposal, do the following…’?

Would be difficult to police though without adding a rule saying ‘every proposal which in any way changes the rule “Institutions” must take effect at the start of the next Cycle following the passing of that proposal’

Of course controlling it is an entirely different matter; it’s not then a case of the enacting admin doing it and actually becomes a tiresome bore for someone to sort out at the beginning of every Cycle, whether a random admin or the Net…


03-20-2012 16:08:15 UTC

@SlamCrackle, again, yes, it’d work, but why bother, if it can be made much more simpler this way?

Kevan: HE/HIM

03-20-2012 17:58:43 UTC

As I understand the current core rules, they abhor floaty “X days later, do Y” effects - if you want something to take effect later in the dynasty, you need to write it down in the ruleset.

Enacting a proposal means updating the ruleset and gamestate “to include the specified effects of that Proposal” - if something has an “on Thursday, repeal rule X” clause at the end, then the proposal doesn’t finish becoming “enacted” until we’ve gotten to Thursday and done that. If it’s not enacted, then it’s still pending, and if it’s still pending then we can’t progress the queue in the mean time (since we can only enact “the oldest pending proposal”).