Consider that 60 cards is same amount as four 15-card booster packs. Then consider the rarity of the cards you’ll get from opening those fresh packs.

With four packs, you get 1 mythic, 3 rares, 12 uncommons, and the rest commons. These new rules similarly restricts deck building by following the same ratios for a minimum 60-card deck. A deck can have any amount of commons and Basic Lands.

Additional rule: no more than three (3) copies of any card except Basic Lands.

Each additional 15 cards in your deck beyond 60 cards grants another 1 rare and 3 uncommons. For each additional 60 cards of your deck size, you may include a mythic instead of a rare.

You can trade from higher rarity for same ratio of lower rarity, or vice versa. That means you can omit 1 mythic for 3 more rares or 12 uncommons. Omit 1 rare to add 3 more uncommons. In reverse, you can trade in 3 uncommons for 1 rare or 12 uncommons for 1 mythic. Likewise, trade 3 rares for 1 mythic. Fill vacancies with commons or basics.

A card’s rarity is based on its latest printing in a core, expansion, or draftable set that are legal for that format. This includes supplemental draftable products like conspiracy and masters.

These rules can be applied to official and unofficial formats. So you can have Hierarchy Standard and Hierarchy Modern, etc.

]]>Mind | Body | Soul | |
---|---|---|---|

Ego | Creator | Warrior | Jester |

Freedom | Explorer | Lover | Rebel |

Social | Sage | Caregiver | Companion |

Order | Magician | Ruler | Innocent |

The 12 Common Archetypes were conceived by Carl Jung to describe the common personalities and drives in all people.

This table attempts the fit them into my trinity mind/body/soul RPG system. This chart can help better define the roles and personalities of NPCs in the story.

Amazingly, the twelve archetypes also fit the twelve Olympian gods. (Greek mythology is really universal, profound, insightful.)

- Creator = Hephaestus
- Explorer = Poseidon
- Sage = Apollo
- Magician = Athena
- Warrior = Ares
- Lover = Aphrodite
- Caregiver = Demeter
- Ruler = Zeus
- Jester = Dionysus
- Rebel = Hermes
- Companion = Hera
- Innocent = Artemis

Sushi Go Party Review

=====================

Final score:

3.5 / 5

Verdict:

Chaotic party game but lacks long term addiction.

Gameplay

——–

Pros

—-

Easily accomodates up to 8 players.

The game is easy to pickup even for children at 9 years old.

Good variety of cards to promote different styles of gameplay and strategies.

Fun theme with pretty cards.

Cons

—-

There are some annoyances with the game, but ultimately it lacks an addiction factor that makes you want to keep playing.

Too much shuffling.

Poor quality of cards.

Tedious to swap and organize all the variety of cards.

Lack of crescendo from beginning to end.

Difficult to keep progress of who’s going to win.

]]>It seems just about every RPG combat feels the same and one-dimensional. It’s all about damage, damage, damage. That also means support and non-damage abilities and roles are underplayed and unappreciated. You can see this problem in MMOs where high damage classes can level faster and solo better than support classes.

My suggestion is to provide an additional victory condition besides reducing the enemy’s HP to 0. Let’s call this willpower (WP). You can win a battle by reducing all the enemies’ HP and/or WP to 0.

WP is mainly interacted with typically “support” and non-lethal actions. One method to reduce enemy’s WP is with debuffs (e.g. sleep, stun, charm) and to raise (heal) your WP with buffs. When a character’s WP is reduced to 0, it is removed from combat.

HP and WP can coexist to provide two different paths to victory and to balance the play styles. Whether you like to hack and slash, or you prefer to demoralize and paralyze your enemies.

What do you think about non-damage win condition? Can this work? How do hybrid classes fit in all this?

]]>My insight on why Civ 5 & 6 are boring and shallow games as first posted on Civ Fanatics.

These arguments about units per tile really miss the real fundamental flaw with Civ 5 and 6: lack of city micromanagement. Once they removed attention from the cities, all you’re left with is unit simulator. That would exacerbate any unit/tile system flaws.

In older games, including 1-4 and Civ Rev, I would give so much care and attention to my cities. Every turn I would fret if they have enough yields and the right amount. Whether I should have extra food or extra production. This seemingly minute dilemma made a huge impact on how much I care about my cities and my civ.

Unfortunately, they essentially removed all city management from 5 and 6. So that I no longer care about my cities, what their output is, what tiles surround them, etc. I used to spend over half the turn in the city screen in older games; now they’re just bothersome reminders. I just don’t feel the connections with my cities anymore. They’ve become sideshows to the tedious shuffling of units. 99.99% of the turn is wasted shuffling units like they’re so fragile and be stepped over.

Meanwhile, maybe one second per turn total at most is thinking about my cities. Really, 99.99% of the time they might as well not be there. All this hoopla about happiness and housing is better whatnot, doesn’t matter. Because you’ll never spend time looking inside your city. Looking after the citizens, how and what they’re doing, if they’re behind in food or production or trade. That doesn’t happen any more because they’ve simplified and streamlined too much of city management.

So the real question is ‘Why did they make cities the background, where they used to be the focus of the game?’

In previous games, you treated cities like they were your children, babies. You meticulously cared for them, tended, checked in every turn to see how they’re doing. They showed icons of the population and makes them more relatable. Food and production progress were front and center to show you their growth.

5 & 6 removed all these human factors. Now they’re just cogs in the ‘tactical’ war machine. You spend maybe a few seconds every 10 turns thinking about cities, when the interface pops up to change their production. Districts only happen scarcely. Sure you have some decision making with districts, but that’s one-time thing per district.

Tiles and yields also feel less important. For one, there’s too many types of yields, so that dilutes the value of each. Second, the interface is set up that you have to squint to know that those yields are there. That makes them feel less important, thus you tend to put less focus on city output.

In short, much less focus on cities, so what else is there to do? Nothing except uselessly, tediously shuffle units around. In the past, I spent over half the time in the city screen. Now I don’t even check in at all until they pester you with pop ups, since you can’t end the turn with empty production.

]]>*I first posted this at Dozensonline after writing about my afterthoughts on dozenal clocks.*

Analog clocks are visual aids, so having too many hands clog up the image. We don’t need to see more than two hands. Only in our standard inefficient 24x60x60 clock system do we need that many. In fact, with a pure dozenal clock, a single hand is enough.

If we divide the day in twelfths, we can see the entire day on a single revolution of the hand. Our current system has us learn between 12 hour and 24 hour clocks. That is redundant and done away with in dozenal clock. The dozenal clock closely matches the position of the sun like a sundial, without extra effort from us to convert back and forth from convoluted hour and minute cycles.

A day can be divided into quarters. We call them after-midnight, morning, after-noon, and evening. Then these quarter-days can be further divided into threes: early, mid, and late. Thus the dozenal clock immediately tells us the part of day:

- Early after-midnight
- Mid after-midnight
- Late after-midnight
- Early morning
- Mid morning
- Late morning
- Early after-noon
- Mid after-noon
- Late after-noon
- Early evening
- Mid evening
- Late evening

The next division by twelve gives us an equivalent of ten minutes on our current clock system. This provides us both the hour and minute values with a single digit in a dozenal clock, without cumbersome and wasteful conversion to base 60.

Because twelve is such an easily dividable base, a large clock can subdivide into **sheek**s (one-twelfth of a day) and **karaf**s (one-twelfth of sheek). Thus a single hand is good enough to tell the time of day that is as exact as the nearest ten-minute in our current clock. For smaller clocks or for more precision, a second hand can be employed to provide us the accuracy to the nearest **fenet** (one-twelfth of karaf, about 50 seconds in our current time system.) But even comparing two-handed clocks, the dozenal clock also tells us the part of the day and is more precise (nearest 50-second versus nearest 60-second.)

A proposal for a new temperature scale such that we set the comfortable temperature for humans at 0′ degrees on this scale. So that warmer temps are positive and colder temps are negative. This quickly tells us whether we need to put on more or less clothes. For even greater visual aid, the temperature reading can color-code the values on a thermometer, thermostat, and weather forecast graphs. Such that ideal temp 0′ is green, warmer temps go from yellow to red, and colder temps go from blue to white. Thus the thermometer has an important secondary function.

The ideal comfortable temperature is the temp at which it is not too warm nor too cold for humans. You wear only light clothes and don’t feel the need to put on more nor take off layers. There many subjective factors, such as how much you are moving around, humidity, air pressure, season, etc. To get everyone on the same page, I shall refer the ideal comfortable temperature as the widely agreed upon term and condition, room temperature, which describes the ideal indoor controlled temperature. This according to popular sources is around 68’F (20’C). This will provide a good baseline to set the 0′ value on the new temperature scale.

I personally prefer the gradation of the Fahrenheit scale because the difference between values feel impactful. When it gets really hot or cold, the change in temperature numbers reflect how your body feels. The Celsius scale seems too narrow to match the human sensation–predictably because it was designed for scientific use, not human conditions.

It would be easy to merely shift the Fahrenheit scale such that room temperature falls at 0′ and call it a day. However, this article is part of a series to promote the dozenal numbering system. As such, I shall attempt to build a comfortable temperature scale under base twelve. However, I will also convert to decimal values for better comparison and comprehension.

Let’s start with our 0′ value, which we marked earlier as 68’F. Also on the ‘F scale toward the colder end is 32’F to denote the temp at which water freezes. The difference between these two values is 36’. This seems very nice because 36 in decimal is 30 in dozenal, a nice round number. Thus we can set -30′ in our dozenal temp scale as the freezing point of water.

Then on the other, positive end of the scale, the temperatures rise and it feels hotter. On the hottest days, it can get to the 90s and 100s of degrees in Fahrenheit. The difference between room temperature is about 20 to 30 degrees. This again is perfect because we already pegged the really cold temps by the same amount. Such that on our scale, +36′ in decimal and +30′ in dozenal is reported as dangerously hot.

Remember the point of setting the 0′ value at comfortable temperature is to inform us at a glance whether we should wear more layers or less layers. When the temp on our scale is positive, it means it is warmer, and so we should consider removing extra layers of clothes. A few degrees up would indicate that a long sleeve shirt is fine. As it goes higher into +20s and +30s, just a short sleeve shirt, short pants or skirt would suffice.

On the other hand, when the thermostat reads into the negative numbers, we should consider wearing more clothes. A few degrees below zero would mean that a light jacket is reasonable. As it gets colder into the -20s and -30s, it starts to be freezing cold. Then multiple layers of clothes, including a thick jacket is highly recommended. You may even expect it to snow when it reaches -30′ on our dozenal temperature scale.

]]>I have written a clock to display in dozenal time. Having using it for only two days, I’ve already discovered that it is so much more efficient than our standard clocks.

My dozenal clock is all based on power of twelve. The clock shows four digits, each digit holding a value of zero to eleven. The base unit of time is the day, so each digit on this clock divides the day by successive powers of twelve. That is, the first digit on the far left divides the day by twelve. Then the next digit to the right of that further divides this one-twelfth day by another twelve, and so on for the last two digits on the clock. Such that each digit going to the right represents a smaller and smaller unit of time.

To convert this dozenal time back into our standard time is quite simple. The first digit on the left is one-twelfth of a day, which is about two hours. So multiply by two and you get the military hour, or hour in a 24-hour clock. For instance, a 3 as the first digit on a dozenal clock means 6 in the morning on our standard time.

The next digit is equivalent to ten minutes. Six of these units constitute one hour, and twelve equals two hours. Six would advance the military time by one hour, so add one hour to the previous digit if the second digit is six or higher. A three or nine means half past the respective hour. For instance, 39 for the first and second digits means 07:30 in the morning on our standard time.

The third digit on the dozenal clock is one-twelfth of ten minutes, or 50 seconds. This is just short of the minute which is 60 seconds. Twelve of these units is ten minutes and advances the second digit. Six is half of that, so worth five minutes. The conversion can be done simply in the head by multiplying the third digit on the dozenal clock by 0.8 (=50/60) to get the ones value of the minute in our standard time. For instance, 9 as the third digit on the dozenal clock is worth about 9*0.8 = 7 minutes approximately. So 399 as the first three digits on the dozenal clock is about 07:37 in the morning on our standard time.

The fourth and last digit on my dozenal clock is one-twelfth of 50 seconds, worth 4-and-1/6 seconds. For the most part, one can ignore this digit, just as most clocks don’t show the seconds, but only the hours and minutes. However, what I have discovered as interesting is that counting from one to twelve in a brisk pace takes about the same time for this digit to advance. So instead of counting with “one one-thousand, two one-thousand”, we can keep it simpler with “one, two, three..” up to “ten, eleven, twelve.” This bodes very well for the next digit if one would devise a clock or timing system based on this fifth digit, or 12^(-5) of a day.

Compared to the current standard method of telling time, the pure dozenal clock can be proven to be much more efficient, in terms of units per digit, time arithmetic, and easy learning curve.

Efficiency of time systems can be compared by the ratio of the number of smallest units divided by the amount of digits used. The higher result means more efficient in keeping time. Our standard time with four-digits holds the hours and minutes. Each day is 24 hours and each hour has 60 minutes. So a four-digit clock we usually see has efficiency of 24*60/4 = 360 units per digit. For the dozenal clock, each digit is simply a successively greater power of twelve. So four-digit dozenal clock has efficiency of 12^4/4 = 5184 units per digit. That is a magnitude 14.4 times more efficient than our current standard clock system.

If we include the seconds to the hours-minutes, then we get 24*60*60/6 = 14400. That looks a lot better, but consider that seconds is not applicable for general time telling. Most of the time, we just need the approximate minute, where a second is simply too tiny to consider. Nevertheless, let’s see efficiency of dozenal clock with six digits. Six digits means twelve to the sixth power, so 12^6/6 = 497664 units per digit. That is 34.56 times more efficient than our current hour-minute-second clock system. Actually, we only need five digits on the dozenal clock because the fifth unit is already smaller than a second–it’s 0.3472~ seconds. In this case, 12^5/5 = 49766.4, which is still over three times more efficient than our HMS system.

Beyond that, the dozenal system will further the gap in efficiency as the HMS second is fractionally divided into powers of ten, while the dozenal time, naturally, continues with powers of twelve. The powers of twelve obviously grow at a faster quadratic rate than powers of ten.

One may surmise that using two digits to represent base 60 is not efficient at all. We could maximise efficiency if every digit of a clock exploited all the digits of a single base. In this case, we’d be better off if we used base 8 to tell time. In four digits that’s 8^4/4 = 1024 units per digit. That’s almost three times more efficient than our current system. (Hmm, an octal clock doesn’t seem that bad of an idea. The fact that eight is a power of two, the binary base, would be very appealing for the masses.) Of course, if we used an even higher base, we’d have even more efficient time system. Like base twelve–which we should anyway because twelve is overall better base than eight and ten in general measurements and math, not only for time.

As for time arithmetic and easy learning curve, since dozenal clock uses the same base for each digit, we can treat any time value as an ordinary number when performing math with time. So any arithmetic operations, such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division is very simple because of the base twelve. On the other hand, even simple adding and subtracting time with our current system is cumbersome. Forget multiplying and dividing. That’s more complicated than algebra.

]]>