Tuesday, October 22, 2024

Proposal: Fixing some defects

In the rule “Synthesis”, immediately after

If they have not done so since the last time the Synthesize action was performed

add the text

(or if the Synthesize action has not yet been performed)

If the proposal “Advanced Genetics” did not pass, ignore the remainder of this proposal.

In the Synthesize atomic action, replace

if two or more Mutations specify the same position, the Nucleotide at that position remains unchanged.

with

if two or more Mutations specify the same position, those Mutations are instead not performed; for this purpose, insertion Mutations are not considered to specify the same position as any non-insertion Mutation. Perform insertions after all other Mutations, with insertions specifying later positions to be performed before insertions specifying earlier positions.

In the Mutations subrule, replace

Choose any valid Nucleotide and a specified position in the Genome to insert the chosen Nucleotide

with

Insert any valid Nucleotide directly before a specified position in the Genome

The rules technically don’t urge people to submit Mutations until after a Synthesize action has already been performed, so I’m making it clearer in case this was holding anybody back (and not-so-subtly encouraging more people to submit their Mutations).

I also address potential ambiguities with the new Mutations in JonathanDark’s proposal.

Edited to remove randomness from insertions at the same position.

Comments

Kevan: he/him

22-10-2024 15:44:42 UTC

“If two or more insertions specify the same position, perform those insertions in random order.” - could this not use the same “instead not performed” outcome as other Mutations?

Lukas: Head Researcher

22-10-2024 16:36:00 UTC

I wasn’t sure which would be better, so I stuck with JonathanDark’s stated intention of insertions never having a conflict. Any reason to prefer cancelling the insertions instead?

Kevan: he/him

22-10-2024 16:43:19 UTC

Just consistency, really, so that the general rule is that whenever two players try to act in the same position, those moves cancel out.

I do generally prefer the cancelling out to the coinflip, though, so that a critical game action can come down to who has successfully outthought who, rather than who was luckiest.

Lukas: Head Researcher

22-10-2024 17:15:57 UTC

That makes sense. I edited the proposal to remove the randomness, but kept insertions from being affected by the other Mutations (since insertions are really happening between positions rather than at a particular position).

You must be registered and logged in to post comments.