[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Comments/Ratings for a Single Item Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier Regenbogen. Unusual spectrum-based game with Wizards, Clerics and Spirits. (Cells: 44) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Jared McComb wrote on 2005-12-21 UTCPage updated with clarifications. Jared McComb wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCEr, you can never attack your own pieces -- the description for the action specifies that -- so the only way you can damage your own pieces is to get them caught in a self-destruct's radius. And you can self-destruct with more than zero health, if you like. And the only piece that can heal other pieces is the cleric, and they can only heal one other at a time, so unless they have their cleric behind the wall, the wall will most likely retaliate. Joost Brugh wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCUnnamed comment was mine. Jared McComb wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCNew (blank) page created here. Please copy the comments over as well, if possible. Thanks! Anonymous wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCI took into account that the wall is not obliged to reduce your spirits to zero health. One idiotic piece can move around behind the wall to waste turns. But I assumed that it is illegal to fight your own pieces to gain zero health spirits. Then you need a position adjacent to three wall spirits to break through. Invade with zero health spirit and kill (fight) one wall spirit. Then the wall must be repaired, so your spirit can't be killed. Then self-distruct to kill the other two spirits. The resummoned spirit can never be killed directly. That'll leave one hole and you can damage the wizard. If there is no spot adjacent to three wall spirits, you need to use self-distruct to instantly gain two zero health spirits adjacent to the wall. Anyway, it must be legal to fight your own pieces to gain zero-health spirits. David Howe wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCHi Jared, you can create a page and I'll copy and paste your existing page into it. Then I'll delete the old page. Jared McComb wrote on 2005-12-20 UTCThanks for catching that -- it should be 11 per side. One thing which has just occured to me is that I never defined how much damage Clerics should take -- they're supposed to always take 2 damage (3 if the attacking piece has a same-color bonus) but I apparently never wrote that down anywhere. D'oh. Pieces should be able to move through spaces occupied by friendly pieces only, as in Vantage Master Online, which the game was originally based on. This was also never written down explicitly. Double D'oh. As for the spirit spamming issue, the self-destruct can become valuable in a situation like that -- once your spirit is about to die, you can do extra damage to 'the wall,' and eventually break a hole in it -- if they're really trying to keep up a wall they won't use it themselves, which gives you an advantage. Did you take this into account? (Just the same, I will consider revising the summoning rules.) Is there any way this page could be converted into a 'member-submitted' page so I could edit it? Roberto Lavieri wrote on 2005-12-19 UTCGood ★★★★To see!. Yes, I think that the ZRF implementation could be challenging. The game itself looks interesting, but I have not had opportunity to make any kind of tests. Joost Brugh wrote on 2005-12-19 UTCGood ★★★★Nice game. And a nice ZRF challenge. I've made a ZRF file for this game, but I wonder whether I interpret the rules correctly. In the requirements, 10 white and black Drones are listed. For both white and black, these are seven Drones (for each Wizard one) plus four spell Drones for the Cleric, which makes 11. Does this mean that the Cleric is also a spell Drone by itself and actually has three spell Drones? (Like health Pawns). In my ZRF, I used four spell Drones (so, the actual total number of opaque Drones is 11 per color). Another thing is that when you are in a bad position, you can build a wall of spirits (say three per color of which you still have a Wizard). And then keep your Wizard behind and adjacent to their color's spirits. When a spirit dies, just resummon it on the same position. So, if I interpret the rules right, the game is a dead draw. Does this mean that is shouldn't be legal to resummon on the position a spirit just died? Or that when you slay a unit in fight, you occupy the position? Or can units even move through occupied positions? Jared McComb wrote on 2004-05-21 UTCI am aware that Game Courier is not well equipped to handle this game. It's actually one of those games which was designed to be played with... get this... ACTUAL, PHYSICAL PIECES, IN REAL LIFE! *waits for everyone on the CVP to gasp* Anyways, to answer your other questions: 'Clear' refers to the clear, colorless pieces, while 'translucent' refers to the colored pieces. Opaque means either black or white, not clear or translucent. Orientation is a term borrowed from videogames, to mean an orientation with a single part of the Spectrum, analogous to having an elemental orientation. And the number of Pawns and Drones which can be stacked depends on their function, be it to determine the owner of the piece, in which case the answer is one, or to determine how much health a piece has or how many spells left a Cleric has, in which case the rules should clearly state the number, unless I have forgotten something. And the references to VMO should still point to the link. Tony Quintanilla wrote on 2004-05-20 UTCJared, this is an interesting game. <p>For a preset the limitation is the number of discrete pieces that will be present in the game. The practical limit is 52, the number of letters in the alphabet x 2 (small and capital letters). I did a quick run down and it seems that a preset is not practical, unfortunately. <p>How many distinct pieces can be formed in this game, including all colors? More than 52, it seems. <p>Another route would be to assemble pieces by making each hexagon a composite of different levels, so the assembly of each piece is done on the board using separate layers. How many discrete piece components (Queens, Drones, Pawns) are there? I count 27. <p>How many possible layers of piece components are possible? If a Wizard has 5 health Pawns, that's 7 layers. A Cleric with health and spells could have 9 layers. 44x9 cells is not practical to implement as separate layers. <p>Another option would be to designate stacked Pawns and Drones by number, P1-P5, D1-D4. How many combinations are possible? I count 8x5 for Pawns and 8x4 spell Drones. So that's 72 Pawn and Drone assembly combinations and that totals to 81 piece components. That's not possible to implement. <p>Additional clarification on how pieces are assembled and what they do may help. Are 'clear' and 'translucent' synonymous? Does 'opaque' mean anything but 'clear'? What does 'orientation' mean? How many Pawns and Drones can be stacked? Jared McComb wrote on 2004-05-15 UTCThe references to Vantage Master Online should direct to the following link: http://www.falcom.co.jp/vantage/index_e.html I would encourage people to try this game, even if it is pretty far-fetched in the realm of chess variants. Peter Aronson wrote on 2004-04-22 UTCThis is an Extra category contest entry. 13 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.