Saturday, May 12, 2018

Proposal: Épée Log

Self Killed By Cuddlebeam. Failed by Derrick

Adminned at 14 May 2018 18:39:43 UTC

List a new Goal in the list of Goals as per the following:

Religious (1 Worth): Have no Dire Goals at the End of the Story.

Create a new rule called “Epilogue” with the following:

40 Days (960 Hours) after the Dynasty has started, the Story Ends at that instant. When the Story Ends, each Sailor gains an amount of Worth for each of their fulfilled Goals, equal to the amount of Worth that the held Goal has associated. Worth is privately tracked by the Narrator and starts at 0.

Once the Story has Ended, the Narrator should post the Epilogue in a timely fashion. The Epilogue should contain a listing of each Sailor, their Goals and their Worth.

If there is a sole Sailor with the most Worth when the Story Ends, that Sailor has achieved victory.
If there are multiple Sailors who are tied for the most Worth when the Story Ends, and among those Sailors, there is a Sailor whose sum of Stats is greater than any other Sailor of that group, then that Sailor has achieved victory.

Amend:

A Driven Sailor may send a private message to the Narrator requesting that one or more of their own Goals be removed and replaced by a specific Goal which is Novel to them (also specifying any choices of Target for it) and which has the same Worth as the total Worth of the removed Goals.

to:

A Driven Sailor may send a private message to the Narrator requesting that one or more of their own Goals be removed and replaced by a specific Goal which is Novel to them (also specifying any choices of Target for it) and which has the same Worth as the total Worth of the removed Goals. Then, the Narrator shall and can perform these changes requested.

40 days is the standard dynasty length.

Also, you can request to have your Goals changed for Novel ones but nothing actually happens because of it. Fixed it.

Comments

Cuddlebeam:

05-12-2018 20:33:44 UTC

for Self-locking because time was mentioned to be a concern.

Kevan:

05-12-2018 21:04:20 UTC

The Religious ability looks about balanced there, and the fix is a good point, but for the health of the dynasty I’m naturally wary of why these have been bundled up with a victory condition. (Particularly one that seems a little more wordy than it needs to be, and that came from a player who has proposed exploitable victory conditions in the past - eg. last dynasty, the dynasty before, the one before that, etc.)

against This seems about right in spirit, but I’d rather see it written by someone else.

Cuddlebeam:

05-12-2018 21:18:42 UTC

I’m guessing you already know that I have others submit proposals for me but it’s annoying to have to do it as often as I like to put forwards things.

Please spare me that chore.

Kevan:

05-12-2018 21:53:42 UTC

I can’t win this round so this is more about the dynasty than competition for me (I’d rather see a fun endgame play out after a month, than a “bang, when I said after 40 days I didn’t say which dynasty” or whatever after a week), but we’re still both playing a game here.

Asking others to react less to your playing style is like being known for clever pawn sacrifices in chess, and when your opponent demurs from taking one, asking them to do you a favour and just take it anyway, to spare you from having to play differently.

Cuddlebeam:

05-12-2018 22:01:20 UTC

That’s normal, yes. My point is that I don’t see how targetting my username specifically is a useful measure.

Cuddlebeam:

05-12-2018 22:03:32 UTC

(In the context that I (hope) its already known that I request others to propose for me / proposal trade. Or maybe you just forgot or I dunno. Oh well.)

Kevan:

05-12-2018 22:29:52 UTC

If I’m sitting across the table from a player known for tricky pawn sacrifices, it doesn’t matter whether are there rumours that they sometimes play other games in amazing, undetectable disguises: they are right there in front of me, of course it’s a “useful measure” to be cautious about capturing any of their pawns.

(And yes, I know you’ve brought up the requested proposal thing repeatedly before. I’m not sure what reaction you’re hoping to get - it seems standard enough behaviour for a secret player alliance, there’s nothing unethical or dangerous about it.)

card:

05-13-2018 03:47:41 UTC

speaking of other players that might do Cuddlebeam’s bidding (or nicely put in an alliance with), I’m quite surprised at how many Sailors have the same name in here as in Agora.

Corona:

05-13-2018 06:43:37 UTC

Checking the Agoran list of (past & present) players I count only 2 other than CB: pokes, me

Though, it would be interesting if two players, both playing two nomics, made a pact intending to achieve a victory in one of the games for either player - then the nomics could influence each other, making it a kind of multiverse nomic system.

Cuddlebeam:

05-13-2018 13:09:52 UTC

It’s a lot less “do my bidding” and a lot more “please do this favor”...

card:

05-13-2018 18:03:12 UTC

[Corona] that’s only the current people, in the past there were at least 4 others who came from Agora and at least 3 of them made deals with Cuddlebeam. Something like what you described in the past has happened but they were in older nomics that are so dead that the wiki detailing that exchange is also only exists on the archive.org.

card:

05-13-2018 18:05:27 UTC

against  forgot my vote
[Cuddlebeam] yeah but your position of them seeing your actions in Agora certainly made some of them more inclined to do you favors.

Cuddlebeam:

05-14-2018 16:20:23 UTC

@Kevan: Well, yes, but what I mean as for a long-term decision that, if you’re going to redtick everything that seems ambitious that I try to do, then the best bet is to just proxy-propose it all instead in the future.

Kevan:

05-14-2018 17:53:48 UTC

I think the line for against votes would just be anything that included the words “achieved victory” alongside unnecessarily baroque or unrelated clauses. Your best bet is probably just to write indirect scams once an unrelated player’s nice clear victory condition is in place, like everyone else does.

Cuddlebeam:

05-14-2018 17:59:03 UTC

@Kevan: The proxy-proposing I’d need to do is for this specifically: ” This seems about right in spirit, but I’d rather see it written by someone else.

Kevan:

05-14-2018 18:13:19 UTC

I meant waiting for someone else to propose this inevitable victory condition in their own words (I think we’re all anticipating some kind of “the Story ends one day and the highest Worth total wins”) rather than suggesting that you dictate it to them.

Cuddlebeam:

05-14-2018 18:18:28 UTC

On any proposal like that you wouldn’t be able to perceive if they made it on their own, if we worked on it together, or if I dictated it to them… (Especially now that it seems that I have to dedicate more to proxy-proposing)

So shrug.

Cuddlebeam:

05-14-2018 18:31:28 UTC

So, shrug*

derrick:

05-14-2018 18:35:51 UTC

against

Cuddlebeam:

05-14-2018 18:36:58 UTC

against S/K because yeah