Allow allied Ecaz in both Fremen sietches

docs/ECAZ_VICTORY_RULES.md

@@ -1,8 +1,26 @@
 # Ecaz victory implementation contract
 
-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.
+Basic provisionally permits reciprocal Fremen/Ecaz co-occupation in either
+protected sietch, adopting the recommended symmetry described below. The
+publisher's worked FAQ mentions only Tabr; Habbanya is an inference, not a
+publisher ruling. Advanced follows the authorized supplied revision's physical
+p32 allowance in both. The older runtime and source audits remain historical.
+
+## Basic two-sietch co-occupation — 29 October 2026
+
+The common Fremen special-victory quote now permits an allied Ecaz presence
+alongside Fremen in Habbanya as well as Sietch Tabr. This chooses the existing
+recommended Basic interpretation under the user's direction to implement
+recommended options, rather than treating the publisher FAQ's Tabr example as
+a prohibition elsewhere. Each territory still requires fighters of both current
+allies; solitary or nonallied Ecaz and third factions remain blockers. Ordinary
+victory precedence, Tuek restrictions and Guild fallback are unchanged.
+
+The existing [quote tests](../tests/fremen-victory.test.ts) cover Basic Habbanya
+and absence of Fremen; the [final-turn engine cases](../tests/fremen-ecaz-victory-engine.test.ts)
+stage conserved forces after setup and resolve the actual readiness/victory
+path, including both modes and the existing negative cases. No mode-wide
+acceptance is implied.
 
 ## Authorized Advanced two-sietch allowance — 8 October 2026
 
@@ -11,20 +29,21 @@ 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
+The shared `fremenSpecialVictory` quote ignores reciprocal allied
 Ecaz cooccupation in either protected sietch when both factions actually
-have fighters there. Basic stays Tabr-only. Solitary/nonallied Ecaz and
+have fighters there. Basic's later provisional extension is described above. 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.
+then awarded Fremen/Ecaz on the same Advanced board while preserving the
+then-current Basic boundary and solitary-Ecaz exclusions. Three Habbanya
+contract cases passed at that checkpoint.
 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.
+**Superseded:** the historical implementation boundary below predates the
+Advanced source cutover and the later provisional Basic extension above.
 
 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).