2024-03-18

模倣子 Male v. Female Mating Strategies

Memetics Index

There is another factor in terms of mating strategies. A man wants "loyalty" in a woman who is available but will also be having his kids only and not cheating with some other guy whose kids he'll have to bring up, but he also wants to "spread his seed" (which men can do quite widely). This is a bad look for men, i.e., jealousy and promiscuity, but there it is--men don't HAVE to screw around. They can just be loyal.


Women, however, also want the devoted attention of one man (or multiple men--more on that in a bit) but also want her SONS to be the gadabout who spreads HIS seed (and hers) widely, hence they are attracted to the bounder men who sleep around--she wants her SONS to be like that, but not her husband. Per the French film "Les Co-Pères" (excellent, by the way) and the less-excellent American rip-off, "Fathers' Day" [sic] in which a woman whose son runs away calls some of her ex-lovers asking for help, saying, "He might be YOURS." So while men have a couple of strategies, one reprehensible and ultimately not so practical in civilized societies (get a bunch of other women you're not married to to have and raise your babies?...maybe not. François Mitterrand famously had a second family, but presumably this is rare and not well-seen most places). Men probably get the most mileage out of doubling down on attention to one woman (unless they're Genghis Khan or something). Women, however, get advantage from the devotion of one man, but also a bonus from getting sons off of a man who is able to bed a lot of women, and also from cultivating the devotion of a group of steady lovers (see Catherine the Great and a host of others). All of these strategies tend to crowd in on one another, which must make things difficult. You want a loyal man to help raise your babies, supply you with resources, as well as sexual satisfaction, but a group of lovers does this even better (and each man can always suspect that at least some of the babies are actually his), and then get some sons off of some bounder so whatever lady-killer attractiveness he possesses (and attracted YOU to HIM in the first place) shall be passed onto his and your sons, and they will be sexually successful into the next generation.

So the choice seems simpler for men. Getting a woman "in trouble" is such a lose-lose proposition, so focusing on finding a marriage partner seems the way to go, all else being equal. But woman can, all else being equal, potentially garner a lot of benefits from promiscuity. However, as the video points out, it may not be possible to get the good marriage partner and sleep around, or even downshift from sleeping around to seeking a loyal partner, as the proclivity may be deeply-rooted, and men don't want that.

2024-03-14

Rules of Fast Risk

 Previous article - Medium on Risk math 
MBJp134

Introduction

I have been challenged with comping up with enhanced rules for Risk that bring game time down to 45 minutes. The previous set of new rules does a good job of getting it down to between an hour or two. I've got a few more ideas that will hopefully speed things up even more.

New Ideas

Larger Die Rolls

The attacker may roll as many dice as he has armies to attack with, up to the number of available dice. The same is true for defender. 

I want to add two special types of attacks to limit the number of dice the defender can roll--more on that below.

Card-cutting bonus

When a player is first attacked, cut the Risk card deck, and if the territory on the card is owned by the defender, place 2d6 (1) armies on that territory immediately.

Committed Attack

The attacker must commit at least three armies (7), and can roll the same number of dice, and the defense must roll one less than that number, or the most possible, but no more.

The committed armies may be reënforced from behind, but the battle may not end until the front line armies are destroyed or victory is won. If they are all destroyed, the attack ends.

The attacker may increase the number of front-line troops (reserves permitting), but this increases the number of dice the defense may roll.

Features of this attack:

  1. All (surviving) committed armies must occupy the conquered territory
  2. Size of committed army determines attacker (and defender) die roll
  3. Defender dice is attacker minus one, or maximum number of armies defending
  4. The attack ends with victory, all committed attackers destroyed, or attacker calls it off
  5. If the attacker calls it off, no further attacks may be made from that territory and one army is captured by defender
  6. The attacker can reënforce front lines, or increase force (this increases defense dice, btw)

To clarify, the attacker decides how many armies to commit, and those will either win and occupy the territory under attack, all be destroyed, or the attacker calls off the attack.

If the attacker decides to disengage, he loses one army, which is captured and added to the defender's forces. Unless the attacker wins and invades, no further attacks may be made from the attacking territory, to anywhere. 

If the attacker is victorious, he must move in all surviving committed forces plus as many additional armies as desired. Captured armies must remain behind, along with at least one "anchor" army of his own. 

The attacker may commit more reserves to the attack by moving them to the front (4), but cannot withdraw any. The maximum dice allowed to the defender is fixed by the initial attack, but may go up if the attacker commits more forces (5).

Flanking Attack

This is a type of committed attack, with some additions. The attacker deploys two same-sized sub-armies.

The effect of this attack is to:
  1. Give the attacker +1 bonus on one die.
  2. Allow for capture of defending armies
How to do it:
  1. Attacker moves two separate groups to the front (6)
  2. Each group attacks separately
  3. Attacker rolls as many dice 🎲 as the engaged groups (2) (or maximum dice available) with +1 bonus on any one of them
  4. Defender rolls size of largest flank minus one, which does not decrease except as defense loses armies
  5. If defender suffers total loss on both attacks, one defeated army is captured and joins rearguard of attacker
  6. Captured armies may not join the frontline attack
  7. Captured armies must stay behind in the attacking territory 
  8. A captured army may not be the only army left to hold the attack-staging territory
  9. At the end of the attacker’s turn, captured armies are replaced by attacker’s army tokens.
To clarify, when the attacker commits a group to an attack, or two groups for a flanking action, the defender can roll that number minus one for the duration, regardless of attacker losses. If the attacker numbers are eroded, the attacker rolls less.

The attacker may move troops forward to reënforce the front lines, or may merge a flanking action into a regular committed action (sacrificing the +1 bonus and the enemy capture). If the size of the attacking force increases, the defender's dice permanently increases to that amount minus one.

The attacker makes two attacks, one for each flank, rolling for the number of armies in each flank. Losses are taken to the attacking flank. If the defender loses completely in both attacks, one of his armies is captured to the attacker's rearguard. If one flank is destroyed, the attack reverts to a regular committed attack. Again, the attacker rolls dice according the the army count of each flank, while the defender rolls according to the initial value (or increased due to reënforcements.

Retreat by Defender

If faced with a committed attack, the defender may at any time choose to retreat with all forces into an adjacent territory (if any). The attacker then occupies the territory and may continue the attack.

Set-Up

Allied Armies

Deal six piles of Risk cards. Every player gets a pile. The rest go to allied armies.

Allied armies get 2 armies on each territory plus 3 more on three random Territories (from from pile for that ally). Allies are now set up (with 23 armies each).

Player Set-up

Place one army on each territory on the Risk cards.

Place three armies on each Risk card territory. Each player now has 21 armies. Once all are placed, they may be reärranged freely.

Shuffle the Risk cards and poker cards.

Each player gets 2 Risk cards (1) and one poker card to start.

Each player gets one factory to place on any of their territories.

The game is ready to begin. Decide who goes first by die roll.

Turn-by-Turn Play 

Reënforcing at Start of Turn

A player gets:
  1. 2d6 armies (1), plus...
  2. Territory bonus (1) of number of territories divided by three, minimum three
  3. Largest bloc of contiguous territory (1) divided by three (no minimum)
  4. Continent bonuses
  5. Card turn-in (3d6 (1) or factory placed at end of turn) plus 2 for held territories (3)
  6. 3 armies (1) per factory (on the factory territory)
Note, this is what a player gets for a poker game (except for Risk cards). If the player previously played in a poker game, he will already have his armies counted out (maybe none left). Factories still produce three armies at the start of every turn.

Campaigning during the Turn

The first time a given other player is attacked (including allies), that player may cut the Risk card deck and if they own the territory shown, they may place 2d6 (1) armies on it.

End of Player Turn

  1. Draw a Risk card and a poker card
  2. Can turn in cards for a factory (plus 2-army bonus for held territories (1,3))
  3. Replace any and all captured army tokens with tokens of player's own color
  4. Single troop transfer through contiguous territory
  5. After their turn, a player may choose to play an allied army

Play Allied Army

A player must either be uncontested, or win a poker game. Everybody who wants to play must count out their future armies, just as in start-of-turn reëforcement. Once a player has counted future armies, that is all they receive on their next turn (including poker winnings, if any). If you lose all your future armies, you can't play poker any more until your turn comes up, and then you won't have any armies to add to the board (except factories).

In a way, factories are a good investment for those with a gambling addiction ;-).

A player must win a poker hand with at least one card in the suit of the allied army he wants to play. Otherwise they just keep the pot and don't get to play the army.

The player whose turn it is may keep playing poker games until they win or give up or run out of armies, or until nobody else wants to play (uncontested situation).

An allied army gets all the same army bonuses as a player.

If a player takes territory using an allied army, they get an additional Risk card for themself. 

The allied army gets a troop transfer.

Questions

The idea of the flanking attack may need work. It makes sense for the defender to choose how many dice to commit to each flank, in an effort to "break the attack" or defeat the attacker's effort to "turn his flank." The attacker can only roll for his weakest flank--does that make sense? Can the defender distribute losses across the two flanks after the fact? 

Maybe the defender should be able to decide from which flanks defeated armies get removed. Or make each flank do its own attack. If a flank is destroyed, that's it--it becomes a consolidated attack.

I'm wondering if increasing the card turn-ins and factories to 3d6 and 3/turn is too high, and if 2d6 to start each turn is too much. The card-cut bonus of 2d6 -- too high?

The big question is how these kinds of numbers affect game dynamics.

A big issue is the time to do battles. By increasing the number of dice in play, and setting up committed battles where the defense is forced to engage in high numbers should speed that up.

Dialing in the card turn-in / factory pay-out (3d6 & 3 vs. 2d6 & 2) and the start-up and card-cut being 1d6 vs. 2d6 could all be configurable game-to-game

Appendices

Diagrams of Flanking Attacks

fig. 1.1. Start of a flanking attack - total loss for defender

fig 1.2. Attacker captures an army, wins one die due to bonus

fig.2. This is changed--no more loss of captureds during battle

fig. 3.1.Each flank attacks separately 

fig. 3.2. Each flank attacks separately

fig. 4. Attacker abandons flanking attack for simple committed attack


___________________________________________________


_______________________________________________

Footnotes

(1) Changing these parameters can make the game faster or slower, but may unbalance play if overloaded
Tweaks to make things faster or slower (suggested)
BonusSlowerFaster
Territory Bonus Normal Divide by two and/or round up
Contiguous Territory Bonus Divide by three make same as Territory Bonus
Rolled Armies
(starting reënforcements)
1d6 2d6
Risk Card Turn-in 2d6 3d6
2 armies on each card territory 3 (or more) armies/territory, or 1d6 or 2d6
Starting Risk Cards 1 card 2 cards
Factory Output
(tied to card turn-in)
2 per turn 3 per turn
Cut Cards on Attack 1d6 2d6 or 3d6

(2) In a flanking attack, the attacker deploys two same-sized armies. Losses may be taken from reserves (if any) or from either flanking army. The smaller of the two determines how many dice the attacker may roll. The defender's dice count does not decrease throughout the engagement. Committed armies may be reënforced from reserves, or flanking armies may be combined into a simple committed attack (which may increase how many dice both sides may roll).

(3) When a player turns in cards for bonus armies or a factory, any territories represented on the cards which the player controls immediately get 2 armies each placed on them. This may be "ginned up" by making this 3 or more armies, or rolling 1d6 or 2d6 (this latter perhaps preferred).

(4) Defending armies may be captured during a flanking attack, if they defender suffers a total loss in a given die roll. These armies may not be committed to the front line attack, but one per dice roll may be counted as casualties if the attacker loses two or more armies in a single dice roll.

(5) The initial number of armies committed, or the smaller flank of a flanking attack, determines how many dice the attacker may roll, and the defender rolls one less than this number (or his total number of armies, whichever is less). The attacker's losses decrease his maximum dice roll, but not the defender's. Both go up if the attacker commits more forces, but the defender's never goes down, i.e., the defender enjoys a "ratchet" effect.

(6) Normally the two flanks of a flanking attack would be equal. The attacker attacks with one and then the other, taking losses from each individually. Each flank may be reënforced from reserves. The two flanks may be combined into a concentrated simple committed attack, which loses the +1 bonus and the ability to capture defending armies.

(7) Relax this restriction. Even as few as one may be committed, which limits the defender's dice count, but if the attacker is destroyed, it's the end of the attack. Actually, the committing of three or more means that the defender may always roll at last two, whereas if the attacker could only commit two, the attacker would be forced to roll only one. This basically mimics the regular Risk dice count rules.

2024-03-10

模倣子 Olivia Video

 YouTube video - Olivia video 

It is hard to get around it. Very early on, there’s a lot getting destroyed. A couple of obvious points leap to mind, however. It’s said that “God is the most prolific abortionist”. Something like half or more of fertilized eggs, zygotes, are eliminated in what looks like a regular (late) menstruation. Anybody who can post about how late this can happen, spontaneous abortion, would be welcome. It doesn’t help the cause of building awareness to leave this sort of thing out, as that tends to convolve things like “the day after pill” with surgical abortion, which seems wrong-headed. The other thing is “her eye color are all determined…” avoided, wasn’t lumped in with the criticism of “inappropriately ascribing ‘human’ traits to a fœtus” (traits are traits, and if ya got ‘em, ya got ‘em, so I don’t have a problem with that, heartbeat, brain activity, behaviours, etc—if they’re there, they’re there, and it’s painful to think about), when in fact this predestination comment may be the worst example. A woman has two X chromosomes, so at every cell division, her body has to decide which grandmother is going to determine who she is. Hence only female calico cats are calico, only women exhibiting heterochromia (I’d appreciate a shout-out confirmation on this) and likewise men, with only one X chromosome, if the grandmother we got stuck with had color-blindness (expressed or unexpressed), we get it. So it’s true that Olivia’s whole body and eye color and future has been determined at conception, but in the same kind of way that today being partly cloudy with snow flurries and a gentle breeze from the southwest was determined at the formation of the Universe. In other words, only true in a way that both sides fundamentally disagree on. The point trying to be made is that “life begins” very much earlier on than current arguments, and fœtuses doing complex behaviours supports that, but saying that epigenesis somehow doesn’t exist. If you’re going to use science, facts, and logic, go for it, it makes a strong case. But if you throw in thinly-veiled superstition and religiosity it undermines it and alienates the audience. Is a single cell a person? Probably not? Is everything about a future person determined at fertilization? Probably not in a meaningful way, certainly not for a woman. Avoid the trap of showing a fœtus clasping its fingers and leaping to “so everything else we said is true, even the stuff that is only supported by vague interpretations of Bible verses, nya, nya, nya!” It’s a moving video, though. Best not to overplay it. 


I was going to make a comparison to Tom Cruise in Minority Report—the idea that if you can know with certainty that somebody will commit a crime beforehand, that gives you the right to punish them? And who is “you” in this case? Who has standing, legally, in a crime that hasn’t happened yet? That may be the biggest existential question here, more so than the impossibility of knowing the future with certainty. But the rabbit hole keeps going down…what about conspiracies and accomplices? Making a baby is a conspiracy, obviously. 

Make a statement, eg, “everything is decided At fertilization” but take responsibility for following it back the other direction to its logical conclusion. 

2024-03-07

漫画 More Disney Mermaids

  Manga Index



漫画 Wonky Disney Peter Pan Mermaids

 Manga Index

I'm in a profound drawing funk for some reason, which suggests that I'm in an odd mood, creativity-wise. I never nap, but I've been curled up on the couch a lot of the past three days. And my drawing powers are askew, as I mentioned.



漫画 Jack Smith v. SCOTUS sketch

 Manga Index



First SCOTUS Letters



模倣子 women self-pressure tidiness

 Original video 

Women must perceive themselves as being more vulnerable to memetic bullying opportunities about home untidiness (probably from other women). This is because there are no people to defend her should this happen (including not having immunomemes available to defend herself). 


If a prospective abuser/nitpicker knows with certainty that she faces pushback, and specific pushback (from men and other women), she’ll eventually knock it off. 


We need to write the scripts, engineer the memes, as to what to say and do to curtail this behavior. This also works against self-bullying (Autoimmunomemetic deployments)