 | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) Well, it looks like there is some interest in the game box, so let's flesh the idea out a little bit. "Must point with your elbow" would indeed not be very usefull for a game like this, so we'll have to give some thought to the form of rules (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Paul Sinasohn
|
| | | | What happens if two rules conflict? Or are mutually exclusive? Should you only follow one rule in the box for the time you have it? (I would say no) Should you have to follow the rules in numerical order as you trade with the box? (I think yes - no (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Like, if you take tiles, replace with slopes AND if you take tiles replace with windows? I suppose that it should be against the rules to make rules that are mutually exclusive. So if you wanted to add the tiles -> windows rule, you would have (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | My thinking is that the person with the box only has to follow the one rule they choose. At that point in the receive-trade-send cycle, they are just dealing with the (potential) mess other people have left. So the current box-holder shouldn't have (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm not sure I follow. Do you mean for any given piece that is removed from the box, you must only choose one rule that affects what you do? What about in the scenario Paul brought up later in the thread? How would that be resolved in your (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) No, I mean that when you receive the box, you pick one rule from the "active list", and conduct a trade based on that rule. Then you cross out that rule, and add a new rule to the end of the list. So if you picked a rule "take slopes, and (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Paul Sinasohn
|
| | | | | (...) (Chris replied) (...) Paul expounds: Here's an example: Rule 1: If you take any 2x2x1 round cylinders, put in an equal # of train windows Rule 2: If you take 1x4 bricks, put in 2x2 bricks Rule 3: If you take out anything that is blue, put in (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | Paul Sinasohn expounded: (...) I guess the way I'd read it, you would owe a train window and a green cylinder. What about using your original idea of following the rules in order with no going back? How would that interpret your scenario? Something (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Paul Sinasohn
|
| | | | | | (...) Paul says: To follow the rules in strict order, you would owe just the train window. (...) I think you take out the rule you used to trade with (in this case , Rule 1) then put in a new one. Paul, who has to fly to Ireland 2 days after (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | I really think this box will die a horrible, quick death. Once you get more than about 3 rules going, many people are going to get the box, and have NOTHING that meets the rules to grab a piece they want. I would have zero interest in such a box. At (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Well, that may be. It appears that there are four people interested and if we four pass it around a couple times, we might agree with you and decide to call it quits. (...) I doubt that's true. I've come up with several sets of rules for which (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) Your uber-rule negates all the other rules. So what would be the point? Or maybe I'm not getting what you're saying. Steve (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Ideas for Jambalaya - anyone interested? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) The uber-rule is something like "trade with the box trying to improve the value of the assortment." In addition to this (according to how I was thinking of it), you would have to follow the variable rules as well. If the rules are: Trade only (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
| | | | |
