IMO, an "iced defending" would be pretty straightforward: "AKHTBN iff it has an unstacked upright piece being pointed 'immediately' at by more pips of flats than its own pip count." On Jacob Davenport's 1-9* scale**, I would give it a score of 8. "Overiced" is a couple notches harder: "AKHTBN iff it has an unstacked upright piece being pointed 'immediately' at by more pips of flats than its own pip count, even if one (but not necessarily ANY one) or more of the flats is/are not counted." That additional complication takes it to a 10. ...but that's just me. Ryan * If I understand correctly, Mr. Davenport's scale only goes up to 9 because that's the relative difficulty of the most difficult rule _on the list_. More difficult rules could reasonably get double-digit difficulty ratings. ** http://www.playagaingames.com/games/zendo_some_rules/ -----Original Message----- From: icehouse-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:icehouse-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Buddha Buck Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 8:33 PM To: Icehouse Discussion List Subject: Re: [Icehouse] [Zendo] Rule clarification [rule against external references] What about "akhtbni it contains at least one over-iced defender"? How guessible would that be? On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Joshua Kronengold <mneme@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > FWIW, I think those are both pretty good and guessable rules. Much, much > easier than rules like "a koan has the buddha nature if and only iff there > are more wierd pips than purple pips. (which is also quite guessable." > > _______________________________________________ > Icehouse mailing list > Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse > _______________________________________________ Icehouse mailing list Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse