2009/5/12 Jonatan Kilhamn <jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com>:
> 2009/5/5 Roger Hicks <pidge...@gmail.com>:
>> [...]
>>
>> 5. (Rating=7, Owner=null) A party CAN perform a Battle Action by
>> destroying a number of Maneuvers in eir possession equal to the cost
>> of that action (default cost 1 if unspecified).
>>
>> 6. (Rating=7, Owner=null) Rights and abilities granted by War-rules of
>> Rating 5 or above CAN NOT be abridged by War-rules with a Rating lower
>> than their own.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> 13. (Rating=3, Owner=null) A party CAN NOT increment or decrement the
>> rating of a War-rule if e has done so within the past week.
>> [...]
>>
>
> Disclaimer: I think this works but I may have overlooked something. If
> this is incorrect, please do not be mislead by it.
>
> If I have any manouvers, I perform the following battle actions:
> I create the following War-rule:
> (
> 16: The contestmaster SHALL award all points and transfer all Medals e
> can to Tiger as soon as e is allowed and able to do so.
> )
> I increment the rating of War-rule 17 three times, to 2.
>
> Explanation:
> The ability to perform battle actions is granted by Wr5, rating=7.
> Wr13, rating=3 tries to abridge this ability, but it fails due to
> directly conflicting and not claiming precedence over (I don't know if
> it had helped) Wr5. If we're still unsure Wr6, rating=7, makes it
> clear that one actually CAN perform the battle action of incrementing
> a war-rule, period.
>
Well, I failed due to BobTHJ timing to create maneuvers exactly when I
was eating dinner, but I think my scam is much better since it doesn't
depend on bribing another player and the contestmaster. If it worked,
that is.

-- 
-Tiger

Reply via email to