The Eighth Dynasty of Kevan
March 28th - April 10th, 2011
It's now time to play the game called Mornington Crescent.
This week we'll be playing under Stovold's Self-Modifying Rules, starting from the minimal 1863 base set and using standard Regency "piece" notation.
(Throughout the ruleset, rename "Chief" to "Chairman" and "Caveman" to "Player".)
Posts of Interest
After an early victory condition (move to Mornington Crescent, which it's illegal to move to) and an early proposal to make it achievable (move in a pattern on the map that spells out UNLOCK in the initial letters of station names to make moving there legal), ais523 immediately attempted to fulfil the condition before it could be made more difficult, and florw followed. One proposed victory limitation was sabotaged by a scam from Ais523 and Lilomar, in which a normal "add a new rule" proposal was adminned so that it added a new rule at the start of the ruleset rather than the end (adding to the end merely being an unspoken convention), meaning that the later fix proposal (which referred to a rule only by its number and not its title) fizzled with no effect. A slew of other attempts to limit the victory condition failed or were self-killed for various reasons.
ais523's original win attempt failed when Josh Leaped him to remove a key letter, so he and lilomar instead joined forces with florw, Locking a station to make the path easier for him. The conspiracy kept the queue in a state of confusion for long enough to fulfil the simple unlocking condition, with florw spelling out UNLEOCK and ais523 Leaping him to remove the stray E, allowing lilomar to move to Mornington Crescent and declare victory. At that time a proposal to limit the victory condition had reached quorum, but as Lilomar appeared to be the only admin active over that weekend, he chose not to enact it. Lilomar declared victory and passed the mantle to ais523.
This is actually Kevan's ninth dynasty; he was passed back the mantle after a quick win in his Seventh, and there is some controversy about how to number the second part of the resulting dynasty, which acted like one rather than two.
Yeah, I still think they were separate for the same reasons I stated back when this was first discussed. - Roujo 16:49, 18 Apr 2011 (GMT)
Erg, I don't like the idea of talking all my dynasties up as if I won more of them than I actually did. The number of dynasties somebody has run seems like quite a big deal, and I wouldn't want to take anything away from another person's eighth dynasty by saying "actually, of course, I had nine". --Kevan 12:00, 7 Jul 2011 (GMT)
The number of dynasties someone has doesn't have much to do with the number of times they won. Several of my dynasties were mantle-passes, and several of other people's dynasties were engineered at least partly by me. If you wanted to look for cases of me winning/engineering a win, looking for dynasties just before ones I hosted wouldn't be a very good way to do it. Along those lines, I don't see why it's incorrect to bump someone's "dynasty number" upon the mantle being passed to them, even if they had nothing to do with the win (or were only tangentially responsible, by accidentally leaving a loophole open). CallForJudgement 13:01, 7 Jul 2011 (GMT)