On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:35, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> Each player has a non-negative integer value Hand Limit (default 15).
>> The Hand Limit of each player is tracked by the Registrar.
>
> I'd make this Accountor too (goes along with salary switches), oth
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Each player has a non-negative integer value Hand Limit (default 15).
> The Hand Limit of each player is tracked by the Registrar.
I'd make this Accountor too (goes along with salary switches), otherwise
the information starts to get really scattered.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
> 6410 D 0 2.0 coppro
FOR
> 6411 D 1 2.0 Yally Terms and Vacancies 2.0
FOR
> 6412 O 1 1.0 allispaul A Standard Standard
AGAINSTx3
> 6413 O 1 1.0 c-walker Office IIs with
Roger Hicks wrote:
> Shrink Potion - Specify a player. That player's Hand Limit is
> decreased by 5% (rounded up).
I think this should be "decreased by 1".
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:54, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> 2009/7/28, Roger Hicks :
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 00:53, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> >> Each player has a non-negative integer value Hand Limit (default 15).
>> >> The Hand Limit of each player is
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Court Jester
> AI: 2
> II: 1
> {
> Append the following to R2255 ("Major Arcana"):
> {{
> Title: Court Jester
> Position: The Court Jester SHALL NOT transfer this card unless e has
> held it for a full week. Owning this card is a Losing Condition.
> }}
> }
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:52, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> Just some comments on these options:
>
>> 1. Destroy extras - The current system. If you have too many cards the
>> extras are randomly destroyed. This requires a lot of extra work on
>> the Dealors part, and also makes it difficult for player
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> I was thinking along similar lines (see my Court Jester proposal)
I like this your implementation:
[from the SLR archives:
* Caption: Hot Potato
Quota: 1
Elements: Persistent
Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:59, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> I guess I don't see the issue. The events that generate draws (officer
>> salaries, player salaries, judging, winning elections, adopted
>> proposals) are few enough that players can fairly easily track
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> I guess I don't see the issue. The events that generate draws (officer
> salaries, player salaries, judging, winning elections, adopted
> proposals) are few enough that players can fairly easily track what
> draws are owed to them and take this into accoun
2009/7/28, Roger Hicks :
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 00:53, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> >> Each player has a non-negative integer value Hand Limit (default 15).
> >> The Hand Limit of each player is tracked by the Registrar. If a
> >> player's Hand Limit would
Just some comments on these options:
> 1. Destroy extras - The current system. If you have too many cards the
> extras are randomly destroyed. This requires a lot of extra work on
> the Dealors part, and also makes it difficult for players to 'store
> up' cards for certain purposes.
>
> 2. Preve
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:40, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> Would your opinion of this proposal change if criminal penalty for
>> exceeding your hand limit were changed to a monthly offense (instead
>> of weekly), perhaps with an increased penalty?
>
> My sugges
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:23, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> I disagree. If you are worried about extra deals just prior to week's
>> end it is a simple matter to play out a few cards in advance so you're
>> not flirting with your Hand Limit. However, I am open t
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Would your opinion of this proposal change if criminal penalty for
> exceeding your hand limit were changed to a monthly offense (instead
> of weekly), perhaps with an increased penalty?
My suggestion would just be to apply a Rest directly without invokin
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> I disagree. If you are worried about extra deals just prior to week's
> end it is a simple matter to play out a few cards in advance so you're
> not flirting with your Hand Limit. However, I am open to another
> option if someone can find a better one. Her
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Would your opinion of this proposal change if criminal penalty for
> exceeding your hand limit were changed to a monthly offense (instead
> of weekly), perhaps with an increased penalty?
I prefer this to any of the other options you have presen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 00:53, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> Each player has a non-negative integer value Hand Limit (default 15).
>> The Hand Limit of each player is tracked by the Registrar. If a
>> player's Hand Limit would ever be set below 3, it is instead s
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 23:44 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 13:55, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> I withdraw my previous proposal "fix ancient cards".
> >> I submit the following proposal, "fix ancient cards", AI-2, II-0.
> >> I intend to
19 matches
Mail list logo
