Saturday, May 25, 2019

Proposal: walkways

self killed failed by card

Adminned at 25 May 2019 17:48:05 UTC

Add a rule called Hoops if the text “A Block may not have a Quarters module adjacent to a Power or Dock module. In addition, an architect may not build a Block so that a Quarters module is adjacent to a Power or Dock module on a Block which has already been built on that architect’s site.” exists in the ruleset, move it into the rule.

Add to Hoops

If a column or row of continuous non-Corridor Modules exist in an architect’s site, any architect may replace one of those Modules at random with a Corridor module.

i toyed with the idea of simply removing those modules as if it were tetris, but that’d be too much of a blow in terms of resources.

posted by card at 25 May 2019 06:38:00 UTC Comments (5)

Comments

Kevan: he/him

25-05-2019 09:25:10 UTC

imperial Losing a random module can also be a blow if it has big knock-on effects.

derrick: he/him

25-05-2019 11:31:47 UTC

against

ehh, it doesn’t make that much sense to me thematically.

Farsight:

25-05-2019 11:55:12 UTC

imperial

Farsight:

25-05-2019 16:29:19 UTC

What about if, instead of changing a random module in another architect’s site, the rule was to change a choice module on an architect’s own site?
That would add an extra dimension to building, but wouldn’t be as potentially destructive as changing someone else’s module at random.
I think it would also make sense thematically: you need to create a walkway through all your service modules!

card:

25-05-2019 17:47:37 UTC

Yes I think that would be better.  against