Just a thought, but maybe damaged == either copbot or shorted out, compromised == both? Seems decent to me otherwise.

It’s possible for a Zone to become both Damaged and Wrecked, both Damaged and Operational, or even Operational and Damaged and/or Wrecked (if Surveillance System is made Operational and later Shorted Out, and Copbots later arrive), isn’t it?

Two the Damage statuses being “yes there are Copbots here” and “yes there are two Breakers here” does make it sound like these might work better as entities in the Tower Table.

Can you give an example of what a Zone’s title would look like if it’s, say, Operational and Damaged? I’m not sure I understand the phrase “end of its title as a floor marker”.

At the present, only floors can be shorted out. It makes sense to say it has a swarm present in a zone, but if a floor in the zone is shorted, I wouldn’t call the zone shorted.

Oh, ignore the second paragraph of my comment, I’d mixed up Floors and Zones there.

[TyGuy6] I think “a Zone may be Operational, Compromised, Damaged, or Wrecked” strongly implies an exclusive or: a Zone can only be one of these things at a time.

Ok, well, I still the question of what it looks like to represent any one of them.

And I wasn’t referring to your comment, but to the proposal. It says if a zone is shorted out it’s damaged, but a zone can’t be shorted out, only floors.

i like it, but it definitely needs fixing

The shorted out bit is a mistake. The tag would be identical in effect to a floor tag; i.e. [Damaged]

Wording could use tightening up on this; I don’t think it’s exploitable but it does need a redraft.  Withdrawn; I don’t intend to repropose, so if anyone else wants to do the premise up then feel free.

Neat concept but some fundamental errors.