clay-borg

History

tegwick 302fc95c97 Some checks failed ci / check (push) Failing after 4s Details GR-E03 and GR-E04 played to the end — F14 closed, and the reason they were unplayed was ours Tier S (a fix and a measurement inside a boundary; chaos d8=4 from CB-WP-0029's roll, no override). cb-play built EVERY game with ScoringMode::SharedGround and passed an empty patch. The mode was settable in scenarios and not from the driver, so two of the three shipped modes were unreachable from the only way anyone actually plays. F14 sat open for a week because nobody could reach the thing it was about. --mode added. All three now play out and give DIFFERENT WINNERS FROM IDENTICAL PLAY: shared -> all four seats (mastery 4), common -> P3 alone (top personal scorer), coalitions -> P1+P2 (best Bond network, 4>3>2). Same 37 commands, three answers. AND THEY ANSWER F17'S OPEN QUESTION. I had flagged that ATTACK might earn its place where Blame costs personal score. It does not, in any mode: SHARED GROUND 132/165/190/200 -> identical free but pointless COMMON PROBLEM 59/52/48/44 -> 59/52/48/34 a cost at six seats BONDED COALITIONS 131/134/132/116 -> 59/52/48/34 roughly halved The coalitions row has a mechanism and the data confirms it unprompted. GR-A07 flips a Bond to a Rivalry on Attack, and GR-E04 scores Bond NETWORKS -- so attacking destroys the thing that scores. And the attacking numbers in E04 are IDENTICAL to E03's, which is exactly what that predicts: break every Bond and each seat is a coalition of one, so GR-E04 degenerates into GR-E03. That check was not designed; it fell out. F14 -> applied. F17 strengthened and no longer bounded to co-op: ATTACK has no mode in which it helps, and one where it actively destroys your score. Still framed as a question rather than a verdict. DARVO is the pattern the game is about not falling into, so a self-destructive ATTACK may be the design. What ground-game has to decide is whether the namesake mechanic being unreachable in competent play -- in all three modes -- is intended. make all: exit 0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-07 10:38:27 +02:00
..
src	GR-E03 and GR-E04 played to the end — F14 closed, and the reason they were	2026-08-07 10:38:27 +02:00
Cargo.toml	CB-WP-0014-T01/T02: execute the JavaScript — and find AM-4b blind	2026-08-02 07:56:02 +02:00

ci / check (push) Failing after 4s

Details

GR-E03 and GR-E04 played to the end — F14 closed, and the reason they were

unplayed was ours

Tier S (a fix and a measurement inside a boundary; chaos d8=4 from
CB-WP-0029's roll, no override).

cb-play built EVERY game with ScoringMode::SharedGround and passed an
empty patch. The mode was settable in scenarios and not from the driver,
so two of the three shipped modes were unreachable from the only way
anyone actually plays. F14 sat open for a week because nobody could reach
the thing it was about.

--mode added. All three now play out and give DIFFERENT WINNERS FROM
IDENTICAL PLAY: shared -> all four seats (mastery 4), common -> P3 alone
(top personal scorer), coalitions -> P1+P2 (best Bond network, 4>3>2).
Same 37 commands, three answers.

AND THEY ANSWER F17'S OPEN QUESTION. I had flagged that ATTACK might earn
its place where Blame costs personal score. It does not, in any mode:

  SHARED GROUND     132/165/190/200 -> identical      free but pointless
  COMMON PROBLEM     59/52/48/44    -> 59/52/48/34    a cost at six seats
  BONDED COALITIONS 131/134/132/116 -> 59/52/48/34    roughly halved

The coalitions row has a mechanism and the data confirms it unprompted.
GR-A07 flips a Bond to a Rivalry on Attack, and GR-E04 scores Bond
NETWORKS -- so attacking destroys the thing that scores. And the attacking
numbers in E04 are IDENTICAL to E03's, which is exactly what that
predicts: break every Bond and each seat is a coalition of one, so GR-E04
degenerates into GR-E03. That check was not designed; it fell out.

F14 -> applied. F17 strengthened and no longer bounded to co-op: ATTACK
has no mode in which it helps, and one where it actively destroys your
score.

Still framed as a question rather than a verdict. DARVO is the pattern the
game is about not falling into, so a self-destructive ATTACK may be the
design. What ground-game has to decide is whether the namesake mechanic
being unreachable in competent play -- in all three modes -- is intended.

make all: exit 0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-08-07 10:38:27 +02:00

src

GR-E03 and GR-E04 played to the end — F14 closed, and the reason they were

2026-08-07 10:38:27 +02:00

Cargo.toml

CB-WP-0014-T01/T02: execute the JavaScript — and find AM-4b blind

2026-08-02 07:56:02 +02:00