As some of you may recall, I released a game called Rush in May of
2007. I had offered the exclusive right to program Rush to one
particular game site, the owner of which accepted my offer and
promised to implement Rush at her earliest convenience. Now after
nine months of extended delays, the owner of said game site has
reneged on her promise.

I've now rescinded said game site's exclusive right to program Rush
and I hereby release Rush into the public domain.

What a huge waste of time that was. The owner of said game site had
originally asked me to make my future games exclusive to her site. I
volunteered to make exactly one game, the next game that I would
design, exclusive to her game site in reciprocation for her promise to
program all of my existing games, which promise was also reneged on.

Full Release dot com is full of shit. Cannot download after payment.
Refused to reply when asked due to inability to download any file.
Only reply to you before you make any payment.

So steer clear of them. They promise lifetime membership but only able
to login to view a long lists of game files, program file and others
but cannot download any file. Try as you may, your credit limit is
always being reached.

To download unlimited, may pay more to upgrade. What happen after you
upgrade? Need to upgrade further, probably.

Bottom line, full of shit. Don't get cheated.

Starboard Y rule sheet:
http://www.marksteeregames.com/Starboard_Y_rules.pdf

Hello to all!
From my last post at
http://nomignolov.blogspot.com
you can download the last version of my program.

Nomignolov is a free universal program for windows,
that plays at any abstract strategy game, puzzle,
and more, described with a Lua script.

Nomignolov comes with some 20 scripts. For instance,
Cibilimny is an addicting puzzle game with score
saving! Can you beat my 832 points? :-)

Learn more about my program and help me getting
better with your comments.

Bye, Jean

This one emerged from the thread about Mark Steere's game Torus. I
shall call it Donut.

The rules:

Played on a standard rhombus shaped hex board. Each player owns a
pair of edges and the stones of one color as in hex, and alternately
place them on board as in hex.

imagine the rhombus is a torus, so that opposite sides meet.

player 1 wins if a NS loop is formed in his color.
player 2 wins if an EW loop forms in his color.

If either player forms a helix (either R- or L-) with his stones, he
instantaneously wins.

ok, middle of the night, and I woke up with this variant in my head.
I hope it's right:

played on a standard hex rhombus, wrapped into a torus. players own
pairs of edges as in normal hex.

player 1 wins if a NS loop forms
player 2 wins if an EW loop forms
if a helix of either color forms, the winner is the player whose edges
intersect most with the helix.

so this is very similar to the games we've been discussing, but the
goals are a bit easier to state. i hope I'm not repeating something
someone has already said. looks to be YMMV.

let's call it Wrex. For wrapped hex.

The following argument intends to prove that the game of Torus is an
equal goals game. If it's not a tremendously rigorous proof, then at
the very least it strongly suggests that conclusion.

1. A hexagonally tessellated rhombus and a hexagonally tessellated
square can both be used to generate the exact same torus.

2. Winning helices for NS are mirror images of winning helices for
EW. NOTE: Permutations which contain helices will not be considered
in this proof.

3. Every EW loop on a rhombus oriented as shown below has exactly one
corresponding EW loop on a square, both of which generate the exact
same EW loop on a torus.

I'll give you a couple of examples of EW loops on a rhombus and their
corresponding EW loops on a square. You basically just generate a
cycle and sample it pi radians away from the original sample with a
square template.

o . . o . o o . . o o . . o o .
. o o o o o . o o o . o o o . o
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bill, you were right about something. Credit where credit is due.
And Torben, sorry but by the same token you were wrong.

Bill said:
"If someone makes both a N-S loop *and* NW-SE loop,
then he has *automatically* made an E-W loop as well."

I found your explanation of this confusing, Bill, but your premise is
correct.

"Here is a 'proof'.
____________________
| : : |
|..... : \..........| Dotty has a N-S loop,
| \......: ... | and also a NW-SE loop.
| : \........ |
| : \ |
|______:_______:______| "

First I have to thank Torben Mogensen for both posing the torus
problem and for identifying the error in my first attempt at a
solution. Bill Taylor also deserves mention here. We've spent a lot
of time in the same neighborhood lately with him always arriving at
the intersections a step ahead of me - not necessarily with the ideal
solution in hand, but first nonetheless.

Torus rule sheet:
http://www.marksteeregames.com/Torus_rules.pdf

In Torus a filled board produces exactly one winner.

Here is my first attempt (for this year!) to construct
a toroidal and locally-hex form of connection game.

It is not really satisfactory, as we will see.

The type of board that I'm REALLY keen on(!), is this:-

| . . . .
| . . . . .
| . . . . . .
| . . . . . . .
| . . . . . . . .
| . . . . . . .
| . . . . . .
| . . . . .

Obviously this can extend to any size,
with alternately n and n+1 length edges.

This has THREE glueing connections, rather than just 2;
top to bottom, NE to SW, NW to SE. They glue while
maintaining the locally-hex connections. As shown here: