Re: [piecepack] Alien City Question

["Mike Schoessow" <mikeschoessow@...>]

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  >From: Aaron 
  >To: piecepack@yahoogroups.com 
  >Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 10:01 PM
  >Subject: [piecepack] Alien City Question


  >My name is Aaron Dalton and I run a free play-by-web boardgame site
  >called Super Duper Games (http://superdupergames.org).  I am in the
  >process of implementing Alien City (and other Piecepack games) and
  >have a question regarding the Alien City rules. 


  Hey that's great. Sure I'll be happy to answer any questions.


  >The rule in question
  >is this:

  >5. The lot containing the suit icon in the corner of a tile may not be
  >built on until after all other legally buildable lots on that tile
  >have been built on.

  >Combined with rules 3 and 4, this one is giving me a headache.  Can
  >somebody give me an example of a situation where building on the suit
  >icon is permissible if there are only 1 or 2 existing structures on
  >the tile?  I am hoping that the phrase "on that tile" means that legal
  >moves elsewhere on the board aren't taken into account.

  First of all, a structure may never be placed that breaks the road network into two pieces, or that cuts off any lot from access to the network, whether or not it is on a suit icon, but I assume from the way you composed your question that this is clear. 

  At first when I read your question I thought it would be very easy to answer with a minimum of words. However after more careful consideration I can see that the resolution for some situations is not obvious. Below I have tried to answer your query in detail. I don't like how my answers may give the impression that the rules to Alien City are convoluted. They aren't in practice. 

  OK, let's say that there is a tile that has one structure built on it, so three of its lots are still empty, including the one with the suit icon. The question is, when can a player place a structure on the lot containing the suit icon, right? The answer is, not as long as the other unoccupied lots on the tile may be legally built upon. So, if you look at all the unplaced domes and towers of each player, and none of these can be legally placed on any of the open, non-icon, lots on the tile, then and only then may the lot with the icon be built upon. 

  Lots can be illegal to build upon for several reasons but the most common concerns the integrity of the road network.
  Building on a lot that splits the road network into two sections or cuts off one or more lots from access to the network is never allowed. This is, by far, the most common reason that a lot cannot be built upon. 

  There are other circumstances that may arise to cause a lot to be unbuildable, but all such circumstances (those related to tile color versus piece color or based on whether or not at least two structures have already been built on the tile, etc.) apply equally to all the lots on a tile, with the proviso that the non-icon lots must be built upon before the icon lot is available for building. I hope this clears things up.

  As for your request for an example where building on the suit icon is permissible when there are only one or two existing structures on a tile, this most commonly occurs when building on any of the remaining non-icon open lots spilts the road network or cuts one or more lots off from access to the road network, making it illegal to build on those lots. The only other situations I can think of where it is illegal to build involve the relationships between tile color, number of structures already built on a tile, and the colors of the remaining unbuilt domes and towers in the game, but in such cases there is no distinction made for the suit icon lot, so rule 5 cannot apply.


  -Mike