Goddamnit Josh lol. This feels like https://blognomic.com/archive/unstable_matter again where you also proposed to have a stuff that you didn’t have, decay.

We can have interesting mechanics without it needing to affect the current status quo this much. I’m not votelocking so that you have a chance to change this to something else.

I’m not going to, so votelock away.

It’s very early in the dynasty and I have the energy to get into sugarcubes, so this genuinely isn’t a sour grapes proposal. I just don’t think that bifurcating the ruleset into two parallel, non-overlapping games is smart. Makes for a dull game.

I understand that you’ve already settled into looking at the game in this way (I see from discord that you’ve spent much of the last day talking about sugars vs non sugars) but do remember that the dynasty is not even a week old; I genuinely don’t see the game in that way yet and I don’t think many other people do either.

The earlier Batteries proposal seems equally disruptive of the status quo, changing the initial “build Machines that use transient Energy or ignore transient Energy and grow Sugar instead” into Energy just being a thing everyone gets: the Sugar players getting it in addition to their Sugar Cogs, the Energy players being no better off.

I do worry that the sugar players have got locked into a “this is my resource, I’ll defend it to the death” mindset on day 4. Blognomic is a collaborative game building exercise first; we don’t appear to have a game yet

this is only 6/turn, which is too easy imo

@Jumble Surely better to pass and amend than leave it at nothing, right?

Also it’s not 6/turn; it’s 1 per Thing, and I don’t think there’s a cap on number of things owned yet?

Part of the reason I’m a Sugar player right now is that Sugar appears to be sufficiently powerful that there’s no reason to do anything else.

I don’t think that this nerfs Sugar into unusability, but it does help to bring it closer in line to other strategies, and I think that’s a good thing.

I do have a wording issue: “n Cogs” leaves it undefined what “n” is. It should probably be “any number of Cogs”.

misread it lol

Holding off voting for now.

I’d be okay with this if we had a clear way for people to remove machines so they could rebalance accordingly. So if https://blognomic.com/archive/machine_what_machine passes I’ll probably vote for, if not vote against.

?b64lines=IFRIRSBTVFJPTkcgTVVTVCBQUk9URUNUCiBUSEUgU1dFRVQu

CoV – in retrospect, I think the other fixes that have been proposed to Sugar being overpowered are less fiddly / easier to play with than this one.

This is only a weak AGAINST, though, and I’m not opposed to having all the fixes in place at once. (I do like the way the Dehumidifier works.)

Changing my def to . I’ve decided that this is just something I’d rather not have to play around. Just another thing to keep track of.