Some small observations on Proposal #81

by AAAAAAAAA! at 2006-07-05 17:23:44

Proposal #81 is really cool, but there are a couple of oddities (I think):

"The Bean Counter's Office ignores the effect of walls. That is units may attack it even if it is at a square with a wall."

To be perfectly clear, it should probably be: "The Bean Counter's Office ignores the effect of walls. That is units and buildings may attack it even if it is at a square with a wall."

"A player is said to "occupy" a square if they own at least one unit or building on that square."

I believe we've been using the word "occupy" to refer to the square that a player is currently on (not a square that has units/buildings). Overloading this word could cause some weird things to happen with existing rules. I think the word "occupy" should be changed to some other word.

Replies