Mike McGann on Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:51:18 +0100 (CET)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] BobTHJ's Refresh Proposal

On Nov 27, 2007 12:59 AM, Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Claim: An action that changes the state of the game can only be taken
> when the rules of the game explicitly allow it, and an action that
> does not change the state of the game can be taken regardless of
> whether the rules permit it.

I like this claim. You state that this is implicit because this is a
game. Should it be rule to make it explicit?

> This is not at all in keeping with the rules, but is much simpler and
> easier on the admins. It's also closer to what you'd do in a real game
> like Monopoly - when you realize you've been doing something wrong,
> rather than restarting the game, you just make a few small gamestate
> tweaks to account for your mistakes and keep going.

True. Another example would be in a game of hearts where the last
trick is thrown and you find out that someone didn't follow suit. It
is impossible at that point to rollback and fix what happened. The
difference is that if there is a dispute in the rules in a normal
game, you stop play and sort things out before continuing. And with
common irregularities, like a revocation in a trump based game, there
are clear rules on how to deal with that situation and how to assess
penalties. With a nomic, the rules constantly change and it might be
difficult to sort out what is correct. And without any real penalties
to assess, it creates incentive to perform potentially illegal actions
to try things out.

Could Reparations keep up with the pace of the game? If some action is
being contested, play keeps going with state being unclear. It may be
hard to define what game state needs to be changed because while the
fix might be correct at the time the reparation is submitted, more
things could happen after the reparation is announced and before the
resolution of the reparation. Unless your intent is the reparation
happens immmediately upon announcement and Players can then contest
that action and subsequently fix it as a later action. If a player
sees what the reparation is going to fix and has x days until it
becomes pondered, it gives the player time to "try and get out of it".

The current emergency seemed to be caused by a snowball effect.
Activity picked up, the game got some momentum, people were picking
away at some of the rules, and when things got out of hand, there was
no way to slow it down or fix was was going on in a timely manner.
Game Actions are very fast and everything else in the game is slower.
There was too much of "I'll do this action in case it happens to be
valid" knowing that it would be days before the possibly illegal
action could be judged and possibly fixed. But, in the event it was
valid, it is best to be the first person in. Could this be prevented
in some way or is this just the nature of the beast? Maybe someway to
call a Mao style "point-of-order" to stop game play, and to sort
things out before continuing? Could a full blown emergency have been
prevented if everyone took a time out and sorted through what was
happening or would it have happened anyway?

This indirectly reminds me of an incident in a hockey game that may
not be relevant. It was a playoff game and I think it was the Rangers
vs. the Canucks. One team shot on goal and it was unclear if the puck
went in or not. The goal judge turned on the light signaling a goal
but the referee waved it off saying it was not a goal. It was
reviewable by instant replay, but since it was not a goal by the
referee's judgment, play continued and the goal had to be reviewed at
the next stoppage in play. Play continued for an additional 3 minutes
and the stoppage in play was caused by the other team scoring a goal.
After review, it was determined that the first team had scored a goal,
but because of that, time was rolled back 3 minutes and the second
team's goal didn't count. That made a lot of people upset but I
thought it was hilarious.

- Hose
spoon-discuss mailing list