coulomb/clay-borg
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
clay-borg/editions/ground-darvo-r0/Modes.csv

5 lines
1.5 KiB
CSV
Raw Normal View History

CB-WP-0028 T01/T02: the cards say what they do ADR-0015 and the import. F18's fix: "I don't understand the GROUND card" was never a design gap -- the card explains itself in the edition and we never imported the explanation. THE MEASUREMENT IS THE DECISION, and the gap is bigger than "one file of nineteen". Of the file we DID vendor, the engine reads 5 of 13 columns: title, problem_text, front_rules, reveal_effect and unresolved_effect were discarded at parse time. The cheapest part of this pass costs no new bytes and was sitting in the repo for eight days. And SCN_01 is hardcoded at lib.rs:1824 -- the edition ships FOUR scenarios and the engine has never dealt three of them. Nobody had said so. ADR-0011's revisit condition is measurably absent, so the dependency argument does not get re-run: across Actions, Solutions, Modes and Scenarios there are ZERO doubled quotes and ZERO embedded newlines. The hand reader's only job is comma-in-quoted-field, which it already did. Refusing csv on a measurement rather than on a preference. Vendored Actions, Solutions and Modes -- the text a player reads. Not the production artifacts (BOM, Print_Manifest, Back_Designs, Symbols). NOT Extensions.csv, which names content the designer placed outside the core; importing it would break the claim that this engine plays the edition as printed. It is now known to exist, which was the real risk. One Table reader with four callers, because a per-file copy is how a parser acquires four subtly different bugs. The GROUND card now shows "Regulate. Restore the frame. Decide." with its GR/OU/ND text on demand; Problems show their own titles where a priority number used to be. The load-bearing test asserts the text is a SUBSTRING OF THE VENDORED FILE rather than equal to a Rust literal -- a test comparing against a hardcoded expectation would pass for a hand-copied string, which is the drift this ends. `edition` came out from behind #[cfg(feature = "scenarios")]. It was gated because its only consumer was; the edition is the game's own data and the shipped runtime now reads it. Test machinery and game content are different things and only one of them is optional. And edition-check was written for a single-file world: it compared the first recorded digest against Problems.csv regardless of which file that digest described. It now checks every file both ways -- a vendored file with no digest fails, a digest naming an absent file fails -- and asserts ADR-0015 D3's falsifier directly rather than trusting it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:22:04 +02:00
mode_id,title,mode_type,tagline,rules_text,scoring_tiebreak,back_design_id
Apply ground-game's rulings: mastery in points, four boards, and a vendor tool that covers what the gate checks They ruled on all seven items the same day. Two were actionable here. F28 RULED: points. Modes.csv MODE_COOP clarified upstream to say "penalties apply to points, not card count"; mastery is now total - blame - denied. A recorded scenario went red on it -- gr-e02-shared-ground pinned 0 (2 claimed CARDS - 1 - 1) and now expects 2 (4 POINTS - 1 - 1). The number moved because the rule was decided, not because the engine drifted, and the scenario records both rulings; its schema has no field for a second one, so both live in ruled_note with `ruled` carrying the LATEST date. F29 RULED not-intended and APPLIED upstream: SCN_02's suits re-tuned the same day. The characterisation test is how we found out -- it pinned the duplication, went red on the re-tune, and that red WAS the notification. It now asserts every pair distinct, the stronger statement the duplication had made unavailable. SCN_02 re-measures at 73 at 2p, not 67: its own board now. F26/F30 ruled and recorded. F30's ruling incidentally confirms our reading -- they name priority-2's suit as the first lever, which is the difference we identified without having measured causation. vendor-editions grew twice, both times because it covered less than the gate it exists to satisfy: - It refused to touch ground-darvo-r0/ on the reasoning that the baseline is "a separate record". That was wrong within the hour: ground-game clarified Modes.csv and `make vendor` reported a clean sync while edition-check went red. A sync tool that covers less than its check reports success into a red gate. - Its two-block rewrite DETECTED which fence held which set and preserved the arrangement -- faithfully preserving a swap an earlier write had introduced, leaving each fence under a heading describing the other. edition-check reads every sha256 line flat and passed throughout: a document can be self-consistently wrong and green. Order is now asserted, with a control that goes red on a swap. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-09 00:15:14 +02:00
MODE_COOP,SHARED GROUND,Cooperative,The group succeeds or fails together.,"All claimed Problem cards form one shared score equal to the sum of their point values. Meet the Scenario threshold by the end of Round 5. Playable at 2–6 players — not a high-seat-only mode. No individual winner is declared. For a mastery rating, start from that shared point total and subtract 1 point for each Blame token still in play and 1 point for each Denied Problem (penalties apply to points, not card count).",Not applicable.,BACK_MODE
CB-WP-0028 T01/T02: the cards say what they do ADR-0015 and the import. F18's fix: "I don't understand the GROUND card" was never a design gap -- the card explains itself in the edition and we never imported the explanation. THE MEASUREMENT IS THE DECISION, and the gap is bigger than "one file of nineteen". Of the file we DID vendor, the engine reads 5 of 13 columns: title, problem_text, front_rules, reveal_effect and unresolved_effect were discarded at parse time. The cheapest part of this pass costs no new bytes and was sitting in the repo for eight days. And SCN_01 is hardcoded at lib.rs:1824 -- the edition ships FOUR scenarios and the engine has never dealt three of them. Nobody had said so. ADR-0011's revisit condition is measurably absent, so the dependency argument does not get re-run: across Actions, Solutions, Modes and Scenarios there are ZERO doubled quotes and ZERO embedded newlines. The hand reader's only job is comma-in-quoted-field, which it already did. Refusing csv on a measurement rather than on a preference. Vendored Actions, Solutions and Modes -- the text a player reads. Not the production artifacts (BOM, Print_Manifest, Back_Designs, Symbols). NOT Extensions.csv, which names content the designer placed outside the core; importing it would break the claim that this engine plays the edition as printed. It is now known to exist, which was the real risk. One Table reader with four callers, because a per-file copy is how a parser acquires four subtly different bugs. The GROUND card now shows "Regulate. Restore the frame. Decide." with its GR/OU/ND text on demand; Problems show their own titles where a priority number used to be. The load-bearing test asserts the text is a SUBSTRING OF THE VENDORED FILE rather than equal to a Rust literal -- a test comparing against a hardcoded expectation would pass for a hand-copied string, which is the drift this ends. `edition` came out from behind #[cfg(feature = "scenarios")]. It was gated because its only consumer was; the edition is the game's own data and the shipped runtime now reads it. Test machinery and game content are different things and only one of them is optional. And edition-check was written for a single-file world: it compared the first recorded digest against Problems.csv regardless of which file that digest described. It now checks every file both ways -- a vendored file with no digest fails, a digest naming an absent file fails -- and asserts ADR-0015 D3's falsifier directly rather than trusting it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:22:04 +02:00
MODE_SEMI,"COMMON PROBLEM, PERSONAL EDGE",Semi-cooperative,The group must succeed before anyone can win.,"The group succeeds only if the total value of all claimed Problems meets the Scenario threshold (always ≤ available points for the seat band). If it succeeds, each player scores the value of Problems they claimed minus 1 per Blame token they hold. Highest score wins.","Lower Stress, then more Bonds, then shared victory.",BACK_MODE
MODE_COALITION,BONDED COALITIONS,Dynamic teams,Bonds decide the sides at the end.,"The group must first meet the Scenario threshold (always ≤ available points for the seat band). At game end, each connected network of Bonds is a coalition; unbonded players are one-player coalitions. Sum the personal scores of coalition members. The highest-scoring coalition wins. Rivalries do not connect players.","Lower combined Stress, then fewer Blame tokens, then shared victory.",BACK_MODE
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink