Alicornutopia

Kevlar; will that do?

Good enough for government work, really.

Do the variants under discussion let us choose our own starting positions? I was hoping to compensate for my inexperience by beginning at Woolwich Arsenal if nobody minds. We should also standardize a gameboard/map. I found this one but I don't know if it plays nice with the nonstandard versions of the game.

I've never seen a variant that didn't work with standard boards, that's like the one constant, but that doesn't mean there aren't any. I grew up playing the Cadency-Second ruleset, so if I make any illegal moves feel free to call me on it; it's because of the minor rule differences. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Wow, I actually do know something. It looks like nobody was considering the third edition Stovold (only the second), so this might not be relevant, though. The map changes in the past decade have caused some incompatibility with the 3rd edition of Stovold. If you wanted to play by that, you would need to either make some additional changes or use an old board.

Excellent, this seems to be attracting many more knowledgable people than I expected. I'm glad to know the Game is still thriving even today.

Participants
jalapeno_dude
pistachi0n
Alicorn
Lambda
AndaisQ
Nemo Consequentiae

That's certainly a sufficient number for an enjoyable game but I'll keep the game open for a couple more days in case more people are interested.

Suggested Rulesets
Aminev
Encyclopædia Britannica, 1974
Stovold, 2nd Edition
Castelluccio, 3rd Folio
Castelluccio, 5th Folio
Cadency-Second
Stovold, 3rd Edition

It is entirely appropriate that we have more proposed rulesets than players. I happen to have scans of most of these; you can get them via the link encoded in my avatar (using the same steganographic method as in the '74 Encyclopædia, which I assume everyone is familiar with).

Nemo Consequentiæ, of course you're aware that Cadency-Second is a general term for the various rulesets adopted by members of the Peerage; I can probably get access to a fair number of the particular instantiations but it might be easier for you to specify which one you mean. I understand that a lot of these rulesets are passed down through oral tradition so you might not know which particular one you grew up using; I've found the easiest way to disambiguate is to recall what your rules for Paddington transfers are.

Given that so many rulesets have been proposed, it might be easiest to invoke the Christchurch Kludge. Simplifying ruthlessly, this essentially means we'd switch rulesets each turn and work our way through the entire proposed list one turn at a time, repeating when necessary. Is that acceptable?

Starting Positions

There are of course a huge variety of schools of thought on this. The one I'm currently most excited about is MCStart, which to my knowledge first became known to the wider 'Crescent community back in the Usenet era. In case you're not familiar with it, it's the radical but breathtakingly simple proposal that all players should begin on Mornington Crescent itself. I find this frequently catalyzes highly original play.

My amenability to the Christchurch Kludge, and for that matter MCStart, depends heavily on the turn order. I've flipped through the rulesets I didn't have now and it looks like the first mover will have a substantial advantage by the time we get to Stovold 3rd unless I misunderstand the strategic implications of paragraph 7-B, or the handicap accessibility status of Euston. Or unless whoever plays on the Castelluccio 3rd Folio turn makes a tactical error of titanic proportions (I presume it's obvious what I mean).

I won't argue with you about Castelluccio 3rd, but I suspect you're misinterpreting paragraph 7-B of Stovold 3rd (compare 33-E, and check the Clarifications and Errata, which should be included at the end of the scan).

That does narrow things down to a pretty limited range of preceding play but I think my concern still applies unless there's coordination between players two and three which would be very much contraindicated strategically in a MCStart situation, or unless you just outright ban Zone 3 Twiddling for the first two go-rounds through all the players. Which seems like it might be a good idea anyway (I mean, imagine the six-person pileup at Royal Victoria, incentivized every step of the way but no fun for anyone once we get there).

ETA: I've asked my boyfriend Scott if he wants to play (if I recall correctly, he was the person who originally told me about Mornington Crescent!) but I will not be invoking any rules pertaining to the fact that he's my boyfriend, as I feel that polyamory unbalances the ruleset for that in principle even if none of my other partners join us. He hasn't answered yet.

Any way you cut it, unfair turn advantages are the bread and butter of Aminev (or teaspoons and dormice, as the case may be). I do apologize if you're unequipped for that kind of thing.

Weren't for the Kludge it'd all smooth itself over by the second round or so, but the Christchurch makes it a lot less predictable. The Cadency round might mitigate it all on its own, depending on who gets it; the Blackfriars fishtail is a killer when properly executed.