I think this works. Punishment for violation could be to permit the aggrieved 
player to act on behalf of the violator to transfer to the aggrieved player a 
number of coins sufficient (but not more than necessary) to enable the 
aggrieved player to put emself in the same position with respect to armour and 
energy as e would have been in if the contract had been followed. (The precise 
language of that punishment may need to be ironed out a little.)

> On Jan 29, 2019, at 1:11 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> Proto-contract: Unlasting Damage
> (does this work?  thoughts, edits?)
> 
> When a combatant is a member of this contract, when they initiate a space
> battle with another member, they can specify that the combat uses Anti-
> Entropy.  Members of this contract agree that, for any space battle in
> which both combatants are members and this is specified, they will submit a
> value in the range N-30, where N is between 0 and 20, inclusive.
> 
> (thoughts on punishment if broken?)
> 
> This contract is not an alliance.
> 
>> On 1/29/2019 8:15 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
>> I resolve space battle 0002 as follows:
>> twg chose 10 energy.
>> G. chose -10 (i.e., negative 10) energy.
>> twg's spaceship:  10/10 armour*, 10/20 energy
>> G.'s spaceship: 0/10 armour, 20/20 energy**
>> twg is the winner.
>> ----
>> *By Rule 2591, armour is a switch with value 0 to 10, so twg's armour
>> CANNOT grow to 20.
>> **By Rule 2592, any energy in excess of 20 is destroyed, so G.'s
>> energy CANNOT grow to 30 (or if it does, it is immediately reduced
>> back to 20).
>>> On 1/15/2019 6:02 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
>>>     ------------------------- SPACE BATTLE 0002 -------------------------
>>>                           2019-01-15  -  UNRESOLVED
>>>                                   SECTOR 07
>>>     Aggressor: twg                   VS.                     Defender: G.
>>>     Energy: ??                                                 Energy: ??
>>>                              Resolver: D. Margaux

Reply via email to