The Sinister Design Forums

General => General Discussion => Forum Games => Topic started by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 08:47:34 AM

Title: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 08:47:34 AM
Okay, since I am sick and tired of people being omnipotent, I want to make a new KoTH thread.

Rules: The Constitution:

Quote from: Duckling on January 08, 2011, 12:09:55 PM
I wrote one that was a bit more extensive. Sign your username if you agree.

[spoiler=Hill Owner's Constitution]Admitted, the ten commandments does have some of the right ideas.

How about:

I, ____________ , registered Hill Owner, do agree to abide by these following conditions:


  • That I shall not make an unauthorized1 or unannounced2 attack on any other Hill owner's Hill.
  • That I shall respect the right of other Hill Owners to remain neutral3 in conflicts over Hill Ownership, and live peacefully.
  • That I shall not recognize another Hill Owner as such unless to gain power they have adhered to the rules of conduct4 during battle.
  • That I shall not terrorize, maim, kill, torture, or otherwise obstruct the life, liberty, property rights of innocent civilians, or their right to the persuit of happiness.
  • That I shall not have goings-on on my Hill portion that would take more than five years in one post5.

Defined Terms:

Unauthorized: a Hill Owner's assault on another's Hill portion is unauthorized if the former or the latter has chosen to become a neutral power.

Unannounced: a Hill Owner's assault on another's Hill portion is unannounced if former has not announced their intentions to attack the latter's Hill Portion.

Neutrality: A Hill Owner is neutral if they chose not to partake in ANY WAY in the struggle for Hill portions. After at least one page of non-aggression, a Hill Owner may petition to become neutral, at which point they gain the appropriate protections. If a Hill Owner wishes to shed Neutral status, they may petition to do so at any time, and after a one-post period, they may resume aggression.

Rules of Conduct: If a Hill Owner wishes to attack another Hill Owner, they must announce their intentions to do so, at which point the defending Hill Owner must present a list of their defenses. Neither Hill Owner, attacker or defender, may attack or be attacked, or petition to become neutral during this time, until the defender presents a list of their defenses. Important: if the defender is online, they have ten posts to post a list of their defenses, or their defenses are NOT RECOGNIZED. If the defender is offline, they must announce their arrival when they return if they suspect that they were attacked, at which point the attacker must reannounce their attack within ten posts, or the attack is voided. If the defender has not returned by five pages after an attack, the attacker may proceed with the attack, ignoring any defenses. If a Hill Owner is on vacation, they may say so, at which point they become effectively neutral; anyone attacking must wait until the defender returns from vacation if and only if they have announced that they are taking a vacation.

If a defender's defenses are listed, the attacker must list rational actions to be taken in response to each level of defense. If a level of defense is deemed to be impenetrable, or Godmod, by the attacker, the attacker must call it to the attention of the Council6, and take a vote on whether the defense is Godmod. If so, the attacker automatically wins. If the attacker overlooks a piece of the defender's defense, the defender automatically wins. If the attacker wins, they claim 50% of their opponent's Hill, and may not attack the Owner's Hill until at least five attacks later.

Post: A post in which action takes place. Commentary does not count as a post, nor does double-posting.

Council: The organization or group of all five currently recognized Hill Owners. If a Hill Owner is eliminated, they are no longer on the council. If a new player becomes a Hill Owner, they are not on the Council automatically. If there is a slot vacant, as a result of elimination, a newcomer must immediately be placed on the Council. If a newcome wishes to be on the council, they must announce which Council member's position they are challenging. The seat is voted upon by the five council members, including the challenged one. If the newcomer is voted in, the Council seat belongs to them, and the old Council member is stripped of their Council status. The Council is the general judging body for settling disputes over the rules.

If any of these rules are violated in a post, the post is not to be acknowledged, and the relevant portion of the rules cited.

Terminology:

Hill and Hill Portion are to be used interchangeably.

Petition is synonomous with calling to an affirmation by a Council member that is not the petitioning party.

Defender, Defense, and Defending Hill Owner are to be used interchangeably here, not to be confused with a defense.

Attacker, Offense, and Attacking Hill Owner are to be used interchangeably here.

This document needs four-fifths acceptance to be ratified as the Home Owner's constitution.[/spoiler]

I currently own 100% of the Hill, and I guard it with terrifying dragons.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: MikeW781 on February 05, 2011, 09:00:05 AM
I don't know about this. The rules about neutrality seem over-complicated. It looks like, to me at least, you said that if i grab the hill and go on an announced vacation, people can't attack it. I think that if you go on vacation, you should just have to give up the hill.

Quote from: Duckling on January 08, 2011, 12:09:55 PM
Neutrality: A Hill Owner is neutral if they chose not to partake in ANY WAY in the struggle for Hill portions. After at least one page of non-aggression, a Hill Owner may petition to become neutral, at which point they gain the appropriate protections. If a Hill Owner wishes to shed Neutral status, they may petition to do so at any time, and after a one-post period, they may resume aggression.

I honestly don't like the neutrality part at all, and I don't think it particularly helps anybody. Maybe instead of that, you could just call No Alliances?

EDIT: I like the idea of a somewhat more structured KOTH game, because I personally just quietly dropped out of KOTH when everybody started the policy of saying that the attacker failed to get the hill because they said they had an unbeatable shield/god-powers/nothing could hurt them. It felt like playing an RP where somebody just said they were invincible. I don't think I ever mentioned it before this, mostly because its a simple forum game, and if somebody finds it fun the way it is, thats great. Its the whole point of forum games, and I could always switch to something else, so there's no point trying to kill their fun. As long as the goal of the thread is to create a similar game that appeals to different people, thats fine, and I like it.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 05, 2011, 10:02:32 AM
I really kind of think trying to find a flaw in a seemingly perfect defense is kinda fun.

I hire a dragon slayer with a 100% kill rate and your dragons flee. I boot you off the hill. Then I take 50% and build a small civilization in the middle of a star protected by a heat shield. Then I put the hill there and protect it by lasers that get their energy in light form directly from the star. My half hill.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 10:46:06 AM
Mike: Perhaps we can compromise on this.

Maybe people on vacation or neutrality may only possess up to 8% of the Hill. That sound okay? I kind of like the neutrality because it gives people a chance to own a bit of Hill in peace.

Buggy, I brush the dust off my bum, and get back on my Hill. Then, I time-travel to the point 5,000,000,000 years in the future when your star goes out. Then, I cover your civilization's heat shield with spray-on mirrors, and release a gigantic swarm of facultatively anaerobic beta fish cross-bred with pirhanas, and they start to attack their own reflections, i.e. your civ. After about a thousand years, they break through and eat all your people. Then, I use one of those grabber claw things to extract the Hill from your frozen base.

Duck: 75%
Buggy: 25%

Then I take the Hill back in time to where we started, and put it at the center of Europa. I then build a happy little moon base on Europa, armed with razor sharp toenail-clippers, ready to slice toenails, regular nails, wires, intestinal tracts, and anything else an attacker might have.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: MikeW781 on February 05, 2011, 12:20:41 PM
I like that idea, I guess it works out well. Constitution accepted.

But, um, before I go about taking the hill, didn't you violate just violate your rule
Quote from: Duckling on February 05, 2011, 08:47:34 AM
  • That I shall not have goings-on on my Hill portion that would take more than five years in one post5.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 05, 2011, 01:46:22 PM
Yeah!!! That means that it's still my half hill!

Buggy: 50%
Ducky: 50%

Then I steal the rest of Ducky's hill and give it to Mike seeing as Ducky's last post violated his own constitution and his defenses are nonexistent. Then I give the piece I just stole to Mike as a thank you gift.

Buggy: 50%
Mike: 50%
Ducky: 0%
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: MikeW781 on February 05, 2011, 02:14:07 PM
Excellent. I guard my hill by placing it on Gaia, from the Foundation novels by Issac Asimov. Specifically, Gaia at the time when both Foundations were allied with it.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 10:35:41 PM
Oh, Bugger.

And you can't steal all of my Hill. Only half.

Duck: 25%
Mike: 25%
Buggy: 50%

I repeat the whole deal about the moon base.

Quote from: Duckling on February 05, 2011, 10:46:06 AM
I take the Hill back in time to where we started, and put it at the center of Europa. I then build a happy little moon base on Europa, armed with razor sharp toenail-clippers, ready to slice toenails, regular nails, wires, intestinal tracts, and anything else an attacker might have.

Then I attack Buggy. I shrink your star with the shrink ray in Despicable Me, and splash the star out with a bucket of water.
Then, your star base grows back to normal size, at which point I take 50,000 [giant ]egg-beaters and destroy your heat shield generator. With your shield generator down, you kind of freeze a bit, and I take half your Hill.

Duck: 50%
Bug: 25%
Mike: 25%

To reiterate, my defenses consist of toenail-cutters. Robotic, titanium, industrial-strength, razor-sharp toenail-cutters.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 10:43:21 PM
Hmm... I come just out of range toenail-cutters, but bring a megaphone so that the hearing range is increased, and kindly ask for a small portion of the Hill.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 10:46:47 PM
I will grant you 8% of the Hill to start in exchange for a promise of neutrality for a period of at least ten posts.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 05, 2011, 10:49:08 PM
Might I ask what part of your overly complicated constitution says I can't take all your hill?
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 10:50:26 PM
I agree to those terms, because I know I won't be bothered either, because that's what the constitution says... right?
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 10:51:39 PM
Yes!  ;D
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 10:54:55 PM
Also, the ten posts, could you explain them a bit more in-depth, are they my posts? Is it ten posts after I've agreed to the terms?
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 11:02:27 PM
This is three.

And Fyer, I believe it's

Quoteclaims 50% of their opponent's Hill, and may not attack the Owner's Hill until at least five attacks later

so really, Mike shouldn't have any, as you took his bit immediately after the first attack, and it should be like

Duck: 54.5%
Bug: 37.5%
Mike: 0%
Dusk: 8%
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 05, 2011, 11:09:00 PM
It's been five posts. And I took your 42%. Which is fair.

I create a breed of quickly self reproducing toes with giant toenails that heal and reproduce just as quickly as you cut them. Then I send the flock against your (you didn't specify how many) 2 robotic toenail clippers which then flee because they are smart enough to know when they are going to be destroyed and have no chance of survival. Then I kick you, and sacrifice you under a full moon on the worlds tallest mountain and bring down a curse upon the constitution that cannot be undone so that all who follow it hypocritically (Ducky) will be destroyed. That said I did not follow it hypocritically because there was no rule against it.
Then I claim neutrality.
Buggy: 25%+42%=92%
Duskie: 8%
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 05, 2011, 11:22:48 PM
Okay, there are so many problems with that. You can ask about my defenses if you're unclear, but just dictating them is not quite right.

Also, they are robotic, not robots; they are only automated. They have no capacity for knowledge or fear.

How have I followed the Constitution hypocritically?

Even if I had, you could only steal 50% of my Hill.

This is the fifth post of Duskling's neutrality.

There must be five attacks between your attacks on the same person, not five posts.

You have to have been militarily inactive for at least one page, or 15 posts, before you may claim neutrality.

I hereby motion to ignore that post. Seconds to the motion? (Duskling?)

Duck: 54.5%
Bug: 37.5%
Dusk: 8%
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 11:27:38 PM
Hmmm? Don't mind me, I'm neutral, and I don't like voting on decisions, not my style. Besides, I'm a bit busy admiring my sunflower to decide anything at the moment. :)
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 05, 2011, 11:40:17 PM
Does this ring a bell?
Quote from: Duckling on February 05, 2011, 08:47:34 AM
  • That I shall not have goings-on on my Hill portion that would take more than five years in one post5.
Quote from: Duckling on February 05, 2011, 10:46:06 AM
Buggy, I brush the dust off my bum, and get back on my Hill. Then, I time-travel to the point 5,000,000,000 years in the future when your star goes out. Then, I cover your civilization's heat shield with spray-on mirrors, and release a gigantic swarm of facultatively anaerobic beta fish cross-bred with pirhanas, and they start to attack their own reflections, i.e. your civ. After about a thousand years, they break through and eat all your people. Then, I use one of those grabber claw things to extract the Hill from your frozen base.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: MikeW781 on February 06, 2011, 08:16:54 AM
Quote from: Duckling on February 05, 2011, 11:02:27 PM
This is three.

And Fyer, I believe it's

Quoteclaims 50% of their opponent's Hill, and may not attack the Owner's Hill until at least five attacks later

so really, Mike shouldn't have any, as you took his bit immediately after the first attack, and it should be like

Duck: 54.5%
Bug: 37.5%
Mike: 0%
Dusk: 8%
No. Buggy stole your part of the hill because you violated the Constitution. Regardless, I motion to make two changes to the system
1. The bit about only being able to take half an opponents hill is silly, and will result in us eventually fighting over half-percents of the hill. I like the old system of just taking the whole hill with each attack. That worked fine, no reason to change it.

2. Next up, and more important, the rules about spacing attacks on one person are silly. It means that nobody can play if there are only one or two people involved at the time.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 06, 2011, 08:30:38 AM
I second that motion. Though I'm not planning on playing much here anymore.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Idozen Cair on February 06, 2011, 09:21:55 AM
Hm. I like this! But 1 thing: Who's having what defences now? I'm TOTALLY confused. ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Duskling on February 06, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
I declare neutrality once more, I'd like to see how this turn out, for now, at least.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Steelfist on February 06, 2011, 03:55:07 PM
Unfortunately, for a relaxed forum game there are simply too many rules. It leads to argument and confusion. I will, however, in memory of the original, try to prevent it crashing and burning as it ultimately will.

I intend to attack Duckling, and apologise in advance for breaking any of the myriad of rules.

I use an EMP and disable the 'cutters'. Stabbing you, I take half your hill, heal you and knock you out.


Not certain how much I have.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: bugfartboy on February 06, 2011, 03:56:12 PM
Try playing King of Thine Hill. It's like king of the hill but with a moderated amount of rules. Not too many, not too few.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: Steelfist on February 07, 2011, 10:43:48 AM
Honestly, I think the only rule needed to prevent empires is no alliances. Everything other than that plain useless: It worked before, without all these rules, didn't it? All you need to do is correct one tiny thing.
Title: Re: King of the Hill II
Post by: ArtDrake on February 07, 2011, 03:49:32 PM
MY GOD (who may or may not exist and is made of car tires), Buggy! Where is there a provision for hill-stealing in response to accidentally breaking a rule??

There is none!

Duck: 27.2%
Steel: 27.3%
Mike: 0.
Bug: 37.5%
Dusk: 8%

Steelfist, the point isn't to prevent empires and alliances. The point is to have a structured game where it isn't just free-for-all. The rules of basketball are about that length, or longer.