Antonio Dolcetta on Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:40:49 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] It Lives! or, a modern subgame (Draft)

shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Yes, it's supposed to be scripted. but I wanted to straighten out stuff
>> before writing the code.
> It does look *very* complicated to me, bearing in mind that these
> rules aren't set in stone.  But then I'm a newbie.  Fun, also, though.
>  Reminds me of a Roger Zelazny novel who's name escapes me...  "A
> night in lonesome october"?

that's why i reserved veto power for the implementator, that way if 
something incredibly hard to code passes, you can just refuse to 
implement it.

>> Still, it's easy to artificially inflate prices and generally wreck the
>> economy, especially since the way it is currently worded people can use
>> the market as storage, while they quit and join.
>> mayor oops
>> Any suggestions on how to handle this ?
> Does it need handling?  If a player puts his parts on the market at an
> inflated price, then no-one will buy them.  And if ey leaves and
> rejoins, ey wont be able to afford them.

player a and player b join the game
player a digs the graveyard and puts whatever part comes out on sale for 
player b buys the part and quits, player a has 200g
player b joins, digs a part and sells it for 200g
player a buys it and quits, player b has 300g
player a has a zillion gold
e wires it abroad for a million points and wins the game

and it's hard to stop them, because only other scammers will have enough 
money to actually matter after the very first cycles.
need to stop stuff like that from happening.

> Although, maybe it would be better if you removed the bit about body
> part belonging to the market.  That way when a player leaves the game
> eir body parts are no longer around.  Makes more sense that way,
> maybe, too - if the part belongs to the market, why does the player
> get the gold?

sure, will do that. I don't even remember why I put that in.

> Too simplistic, maybe, but the simplest winning condition would be
> "last one left in the game".  That would require a rule only allowing
> joining the game after someone had won it...

that would be too slow I think, and it's no fun to see other people 
playing while you can't.

spoon-discuss mailing list