Re: piecepack design workshop #2: Stations v1.2 by Michael Schoessow

["Brett Myers" <brettspiel@...>]

Ah, well I see at least a couple of my rules questions have been
covered in previous posts.  In my defense, this is my firt time
looking at one of these piecepack design workshops.  Blame Mark, he
made me play it!  ;)

Brett

--- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Brett Myers" <brettspiel@g...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Mike
>
>
> >   >I think it would be helpful to have a picture showing how
there
> could
> >   >be two disconnected networks.  From the starting board
> position, it
> >   >wasn't immediately obvious to us, only near the end of the
game
> when
> >   >we could seal off a pocket of roads in the middle due to
earlier
> >   >shifts did this rule make sense.
> >
> >   You do understand that a move that splits the network into two
> separate sections is not allowed, right? I assume your comment
> reflects the fact that, during much of the game, there are no
> opportunities to make a such a move, even if it was legal.
> >
>
>
> We understood that splitting the network was illegal - it was
mainly
> a problem in visualization, I think.  At first read-through of the
> rules, we couldn't picture a situation where one would be able to
> split the network, with the constant path around the outside.  It
> became obvious later, in play.  I think Mark was suggesting a
> diagram of a negative example in the rules, just to clarify that
> bit.
>
>
> >   >It seemed as though a first-player advantage would be
mitigated
> by the
> >   >second player making the last move, which could be
devastating
> (as in
> >   >our game making every path doubled for me) with the first
> player not
> >   >having a chance to respond and repair their network.
> >
> >   Yes, I am a bit worried about a first player advantage, but as
> you note, there can also be a last player advantage. The way the
> rules are presently written, each player takes an equal number of
> turns in a game, so the player who went second does always get the
> last move.
> >   How do you feel about the number of "slide only" moves in the
> end game? Did three seem a good number to you? Do you have an
> opinion on number of end-game moves versus the powerfulness of the
> last move? Perhaps I could add a rule concerning what can be
> accomplished on the final slide, although I generally hate rules
> that are obvious "fixes", especially if it's not yet clear that
> anything needs fixing.
> >
>
>
> To be honest, I didn't really like the slide only moves at the
end.
> It felt sort of counterintuitive, after spending the majority of
the
> game cleverly constructing my network, rationing a few of my
> precious slides to try and block my opponent when possible, to
then
> spend three turns actively attacking each other or desperately
> repairing my now-ruined network.  Of course, that may be part of
the
> appeal for some.
>
>
> >   >I didn't try any variants, but I would be in favor of having
the
> >   >standard game be the old Variant 2, where all coins are worth
> 1, and
> >   >plan to try that version out next.
> >
> >   If you do try that I would be extremely interested in how you
> thought it compared to the version you tried, since I haven't yet
> decided for sure which version I want to make the standard version.
> >
>
>
> We didn't go over any of the official variants when we played, but
a
> couple of ideas did spring to mind that I would like to try out.
>
> 1. A player may not slide a tile that holds his opponent's station
> (pawn or coin).  This may add some tactical opportunities for
> station placement, and would provide a strategic use for the null
> coin beyond simple bluff-placement.
>
> 2. On his turn, player may either slide a tile or build a station -

> never both.  This variant would need a game-end trigger - I'd
> suggest the final round is triggered when one player has placed
his
> last station.  Both players may then take one final turn before
> scores are computed.  I would like to try this variant with the
> above variant.
>
> Granted, these are a fairly radical departure from your original
> rule-set, but that's the spirit of the PiecePack!
>
>
> Finally, I have some observations about the clarity of the rules.
>
> 1. The rules say that a station can only be accessed from the two
> adjacent sides of its tile corner, but the diagram in the lower
left
> of Figure 1 only counts 3 spaces to access, which would put the
> access point on the diagonal space.
>
> 2. On a similar note, the counting of spaces only recognizes the
> diagonal "intersection" space when crossing directly over it.  The
> center diagram counts 4 spaces to access, skipping the diagonal
> space, while the rightmost diagram counts 5 spaces to access,
> including the intersection space.  Shouldn't we count 12 spaces of
> distance around an unblocked tile perimeter (2 per side, plus the
4
> corners)?
>
> 3. Can a player slide a tile in such a way that it pushes another
> tile?  For example, referring to the diagram in the upper left of
> Figure 1, can a player slide the lower tile upward, pushing the
> already-adjacent tile 1/2 width as well?
>
>
> I hope I've been clear and not too pushy in my suggestions!
>
> Thanks for an interesting game,
>
> Brett
>