> From: David Artman <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Exactumundo! In the end, we want good games that encourage purchase of a > second set: that's my gauge as Coordinator for accepting a submission. OK, having made Chicken Run, and thinking (only THINKING) of submitting it for the IGDC, it brought to mind another wiggle of acceptance for the IGDC. If a game *could* be played with 3 or more more sets using an alternate setup, but it is *possible* (nay--it is the *default mode of play*) to play it with only 2 sets (but *not* only 1) then it qualifies. This is a slight amendment to Don's math of ( 1 < required sets <= 2 ) merely because it permits an extended case of an alternate setup that uses more than 2 sets, but does not absolutely *require* more than 2 sets. Ugh... I ain't running another product-based design restriction IGDC. Too many damned corner cases and alternative setups and scaling issues and applicability issues (e.g. in an MC design restriction competition, using Martian Coasters just as a 6x6 board with no consideration of their colors or arrows or significant squares--ex: MegaVolcano could be an "MC game," with such trivial/irrelevant usage of the MCs). David