Loadstar 248/248.d81/t.shamrocks

Text File | 2022-08-26 | 5KB | 183 lines

u
          S H A M R O C K S

    Text and Code by Maurice Jones

        ML tools by Lee Novak


    A couple of days ago while
channel-surfing, I rode a wave into a
Microsoft commercial. A fellow was
sitting at a computer, saying
something like this, "My job is to
break software. I try to anticipate
what users may do that may cause the
software to break, so that we can fix
it." I have never seen a computer
running on Windows, but I am told that
there are a fairly large number of
"fixes" available for download. The
guy must not be doing a real good
job.

    We LOADSTAR programmers try to
"break" our software, too, and like
Microsoft's guys we sometimes miss
something. A while back Glen Shue of
Silver Springs, Maryland wrote to
Fender that my game AGNES (LS #166)
would allow plays that it shouldn't.
The game is one of those where the
base card for the foundation piles is
determined by the deal. Empty spaces
in the tableau are to be filled only
by cards one less in value than the
value of the base card, with aces
wrapping to kings. As published, the
game allows all such plays but in
addition will allow a king to be
played to empty spaces, no matter what
the base card is.

    I have not kept score, but every
few months I get a call from Fender
which starts, "Judi was playing your
game and she says... ." These days I
can usually fix the problem in a
matter of minutes, not because of any
great expertise, but because my shell
consists of proven routines and
because I am so familiar with the
shell and the types of errors that
I am likely to make. Often after such
a call, I check my entire collection
of finished programs for similar
errors. Still, something gets by us
now and then.

     In the case of AGNES, the game
can be played with or without taking
advantage of the chance to play kings
to empty piles. If the player wants to
play by the rules, he can do so with
no problem. If he decides to bend the
rules, that causes no problem in the
further play of the game. I called
Fender and I think we agreed to
consider the chance of playing the
kings as an "undocumented" feature.
[:-)]

    This month's game, SHAMROCKS, is
another which has so many piles that I
wrote it so that it is only playable
with a joystick/mouse. The menus may
be manipulated with both the keyboard
and the joystick/mouse.

    SHAMROCKS has the same layout and
the same object as LA BELLE LUCIE, but
there the similarities end. In fact,
the player is wise to try to forget
that he knows both games, because
winning stategies are very different.

    Tableau piles may contain no more
than three cards, a type of rule which
is rare if not unique. Builds may be
upward or downward and are without
regard to suit. As I write this, the
game has been finished for nine
months, and I still am not sure that I
have found all the best strategies.
Morehead and Mott-Smith give winning
chances as one in four. I believe that
if I play the game exclusively for
several days, I can do better than
that. In any case, this is a very
intriguing game.

              -- mj 25 Sept 98

 [FENDER'S POSTMUMBLE:] This is
indeed an interesting game, so
interesting I had a hard time moving
on to something else. Maybe it was
because I won the first three games I
played?

 I wonder about the rule that causes
any king covering a card of the same
suit to be moved under the card. In
some games, such a situation would
cause the puzzle to be impossible to
solve, but not in this one. At least
I don't think so. If there were no
way to move a king off of a lower
card, then it would indeed be
impossible to get to the lower card
but it's quite easy to move a king in
this game -- just move it onto a
queen, as soon as a queen is showing
on a one- or two-card fan.

 I'm sure that moving a king under a
card of the same suit makes the game
somewhat easier to win, but is it
necessary? Of course I could call
Maurice and ask him what he thinks
about this question and once he'd
refreshed his mind about the game
(which, after all, he wrote months
ago) he would probably come up with a
cogent answer. But that would take
some of the fun out of publishing.

 I often pose a question on LOADSTAR
that could undoubtedly be answered
with a phone call or a little
research. But if I did either of
those, then I couldn't honestly pose
the question, unless I assumed a "I
know the answer, but do you?"
position. Usually, I'd rather just
stay stupid and let one of the
LOADSTARites come up with the answer.
It's more fun for both of us, I hope.
And besides, about 50 percent of the
time, a LOADSTARite has a better
answer.

 FT

[DAVE'S RAVE]

 I became addicted to this solitaire
on the Nickel Games platform. It is
like no other solitaire I have played.
In my experience, I have found a
couple of things to watch out for.

 First, if the hand comes up with an
ace in the single card slot and no
deuce in sight -- give it up!
Actually, unless you can get a couple
of aces up and several other cards on
the stacks, you won't have room enough
to win.

 The other trick I have learned is
that when you stack cards in reverse
order (five on four on three), try to
make sure the suites are all
different. This is especially true
when reverse-stacking royalty. There
is nothing worse than ending up with a
King of Hearts on a Queen of Diamonds
and a King of Diamonds on a Queen of
Hearts.

 DMM