Connect supplied Advanced Fremen Ecaz two-sietch victory allowance
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
d438d923a3
commit
0315917987
7 files changed
+54
-17
No files matched your search
@@ -1,8 +1,30 @@
|
||||
# Ecaz victory implementation contract
|
||||
|
||||
The [14 September runtime follow-up](#fremen-final-turn-runtime-follow-up) connects
|
||||
the explicit Fremen/Ecaz Sietch Tabr exception. The original audit and its
|
||||
unimplemented Habbanya inference remain below as source context.
|
||||
Basic retains the [14 September Tabr-only runtime](#fremen-final-turn-runtime-follow-up).
|
||||
Advanced now follows the authorized supplied revision's physical p32 allowance
|
||||
in both protected sietches. The publisher audit below remains historical context.
|
||||
|
||||
## Authorized Advanced two-sietch allowance — 8 October 2026
|
||||
|
||||
`UNOFFICIAL_Revised_Dune_Rulebook_v.2.3_web.pdf`, physical **p32,
|
||||
Fremen I**, permits “Fremen forces (± coexisting Ecaz forces) or no one”
|
||||
in **Sietch Tabr and Habbanya Sietch**. This is an explicit Advanced
|
||||
source cutover, not a newly located publisher symmetry ruling.
|
||||
|
||||
The shared `fremenSpecialVictory` quote now ignores reciprocal allied
|
||||
Ecaz cooccupation in either protected sietch when both factions actually
|
||||
have fighters there. Basic stays Tabr-only. Solitary/nonallied Ecaz and
|
||||
third-faction fighters still block; other Tuek/final-turn/ordinary-winner/
|
||||
prediction/fallback conditions do not change. Public progress and real
|
||||
victory evaluation consume the same quote without another decision.
|
||||
|
||||
One native Collection-to-Mentat smoke reproduces the old Guild fallback,
|
||||
then awards Fremen/Ecaz on the same Advanced board while preserving
|
||||
Basic and solitary-Ecaz exclusions. Three Habbanya contract cases pass.
|
||||
No broad suite or deployed acceptance was run.
|
||||
|
||||
**Superseded for Advanced:** the Habbanya rows below predate the authorized
|
||||
supplied p32 cutover above. Basic still follows the Tabr-only audit.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary-source review, 2026-09-07. This separates the explicit three-stronghold rule from its ordinary control and prediction consequences. No combat-rounding decision is needed for a victory predicate operating on an already-settled board. The unrelated rounding conflict remains as corrected in [Ecaz Occupy rules](ECAZ_OCCUPY_RULES.md).
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -38,7 +60,7 @@ Stronghold Cards are benefits held between end-turn settlements, not additional
|
||||
|
||||
Base p.16 requires Sietch Tabr and Habbanya Sietch to be empty or occupied only by Fremen for its last-turn special victory. The November FAQ p.5 expressly says ordinary allied forces do not count as Fremen for this restriction. E3 p.15 then specifically allows **Ecaz and Fremen co-occupying Sietch Tabr**. [Base p.16](https://www.gf9games.com/dunegame/wp-content/uploads/Dune-Rulebook.pdf#page=16), [November FAQ p.5](https://www.gf9games.com/dune/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Dune-FAQ-Nov-2020.pdf#page=5), [E3 p.15](https://www.gf9games.com/dune/wp-content/uploads/EcazMoritani-Rulebook-LOWRES.pdf#page=15)
|
||||
|
||||
The supported narrow implementation requires an actual reciprocal Ecaz/Fremen alliance and Fremen presence **in that same territory** before ignoring Ecaz's additional presence. Ecaz alone in Sietch Tabr does not meet the stated co-occupation exception. Presence of any further faction remains disqualifying. A blanket `p.faction === 'ecaz'` exemption would permit non-allied or solitary Ecaz and is not justified by the FAQ.
|
||||
The supported narrow implementation requires an actual reciprocal Ecaz/Fremen alliance and Fremen presence **in that same territory** before ignoring Ecaz's additional presence. Ecaz alone in Sietch Tabr does not meet the stated co-occupation exception. Presence of any further faction remains disqualifying. A blanket `p.faction === 'ecaz'` exemption would permit non-allied or solitary Ecaz and is not justified by the FAQ. Advanced supersedes the Tabr-only scope above.
|
||||
|
||||
| Protected territory occupants | Result and evidence |
|
||||
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user