On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, David Artman wrote:
taking this table (assuming it's correct), I got the same result as
dale Sheldon of
pylo > subd > zamb > geom > peng > moon > mart > trip
If no one else objects or wishes to correct anything, I am happy with
this as the final result, being corroborated by two folks who apparently
understand the method far better than I do.
In that case, congratulations to Pylon and its designer!
I remember reading the rules for the game and thinking "Enh, seems too
simple." And then, I sat down to play my first game of it. My oponent
placed a large in the center of the board and I... seized up. There was
so much to consider!
Simple rules, but deep, deep strategy; this game strikes me as more like
Go than either Martian Go or Branches, Twigs, and Thorns.
(Now, a brief digression about Condorcet Ranked Pairs and politics:
I wish we used this method to vote for public office. As someone who's
gotten good and pissed at the Republican Party in the last 7 years, but
who still has a healthy distrust for the Democratic Party, I think a
Condorcet method is the only chance of breaking the two-party system's
hold on American politics. So if you're a Green or a Libertarian or, like
me, just sick of Democan/Republicrat nonsense, you owe it to yourself to
learn this system and to try to spread it beyond this forum. Use it among
your coworkers when decideding where to go for lunch; use it for choosing
officers in whatever organization you're a member of (PTA, HOA, another
hobby group); and then try to get it used for local government office; for
state office; and maybe someday not to far away, for national office.)