Thursday, August 11, 2016

Proposal: KABOOM!!

Any Hunter may submit a Proposal to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “Proposal” category that describes those changes (unless the Hunter already has 2 Proposals pending, or has already made 3 Proposals that day).

both: http://blognomic.com/archive/and_another_thing1 and http://blognomic.com/archive/otherwise1 were still pending which this proposal was made.—Clucky

Adminned at 11 Aug 2016 15:01:48 UTC

Enact a new rule, Defences.

Any Hunter may, at any time, fortify an island. To do this, one must pay a fine of (2/3)c, where c is the size of that Hunter’s Ship’s Hold Size. (If there is a decimal, round up to the nearest whole number.) The Island is said to belong to that Hunter after such an action. A Hunter may not step on an fortified island without paying the proper tax of 1/25c Peices. The definition of c is the size of the Hunter that owns the island’s ship Hold Size. This allows a Hunter to become Ruined. If a Hunter wishes, they may Tear Down an island’s Fortifications. To do such a thing, they must wait until the owner is Offline, or they have not made a post or a comment in at least one hour. They must spend an equal amount of Peices to the Hunter that owns the Island spent when he built the Fortifications. After such an action, the Hunter that had built the Fortifications no longer owns the Island.

Add a subrule, Cannons.

A Hunter may, if they have a Fortified Island, spend 30 Peices to buy a Cannon. They may pick an Island adjacent to the Fortified island, and aim the Cannon at it. That Island is subject to 1/2 the taxes on the fortified island. A cannon may not be aims at a Fortified island. A cannon may not be put on an island that has a cannon aiming at it. If fortifications are built on an island when there is a cannon aiming at it, the cannon is immediately destroyed.

For this to be functional, we need to add a way to get Peices, and lots of them.

Comments

qwertyu63:

11-08-2016 12:58:49 UTC

against I just don’t like the idea. Building a fortress in the middle of a treasure hunt just doesn’t thematically gel with me.

By the way, it’s spelled Pieces, not Peices.

qwertyu63:

11-08-2016 13:01:20 UTC

Looking closer, I’m also against any mechanic that is that sensitive to login schedules.

Matt:

11-08-2016 13:08:09 UTC

against  Same concern as qwerty—it’s easy enough to write a login script to access the site every <1hr. Btw, has automation of this sort (auto-login) been explicitly forbidden?

Sci_Guy12:

11-08-2016 13:30:33 UTC

But making a post every hour?

Aname:

11-08-2016 14:29:51 UTC

against Both of qwerty’s concerns, especially login times. It’s difficult to check the validity of actions afterwards without having access to some kind of a server log; also, posting is similarly automatable (though it might be forbidden).

Clucky: he/him

11-08-2016 14:52:50 UTC

> one must pay a fine of (2/3)c

pay what?


> A Hunter may not step

What does this mean? As a rule of thumb, referencing undefined game mechanics in rules is generally something we want to avoid.


> To do such a thing, they must wait until the owner is Offline, or they have not made a post or a comment in at least one hour.

any mechanic that makes it so that players have to stay online 24/7 to play optimally is very very bad

against

Clucky: he/him

11-08-2016 15:00:49 UTC

also I just realized this proposal was made illegally (sci_guy already had two pending proposals)