I did like the movie though, with the sole exception of the lighting. It did a very good job of displaying the translucency of the pieces, but it kind of looked like the only light was from a flash bulb sometimes (though that was most assuredly not the case as there were reflections from various light sources coming towards the camera). -Evan On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Elliott C. Evans <eeyore@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > thedunwichhorror@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >> Has anyone ever discussed adding to defenders? Stacking like trees >> to add to their value. > > Icehouse is a physical game, almost a sport really. It relies on each > footprint having a definite value. Allowing players to meddle with > those values begins an arms race. > > A common situation is for a defender to be semi-fortressed, maybe it > is at the edge of the snowball with only two openings that allow for > attacks. The defender can be iced, but only by a maximum of six points. > Once two 3-pointers are attacking the piece, it is locked up and no > more attacks can be added. If the defender is a 3-pointer and stacking > is allowed, it's too easy for to stack another 3-pointer on it and > squander both attackers with no hope of redemption, unless of course > you allow stacked attacks. Then the defender stacks. Then the attacker > stacks. Etcetera. > > A large part of playing Icehouse is determining your balance between > attacks and defenders. Anything that increases the strategic value > of defenders discourages attackers and changes the game's balance. > >> Not to mention making all of my filled pieces useless. > > This is one of the reasons I like playing Icehouse with filled pieces, > it discourages any thoughts of stacking. =^> > > -- > Elliott C. "Eeyore" Evans > eeyore@xxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ > Icehouse mailing list > Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse >