[Variant] Shared (old name Twice)

[Romain672]

edit: It would be best to have two suits which can be played on two differents stacks. That mean "White Null Shared (6 Suits)" would be like "White & Null (6 Suits)" except white cards would be accepted to be played on the null stack, and null cards would be accepted to be played on the white stack. So on any variant, or on any shared variant, when u3 play, first the server check if u3 can be played on the null stack:

• if yes it play there
• if not, then the server check if the 'share' part contain the null suit:
  • if not, it bomb
  • if yes, then the server check if the card could be played on the second suit of the 'shared' part: - if not, it bomb - if yes, it play on the other stack

Once this is done, please create to test:

• "Shared (6 Suits)" which make Purple and Teal share two stacks
• "Shared (3 Suits)" which make Green? and Blue? share two stacks
• "Black Shared (6 Suits)" which make Black and Purple share two stacks
• "Brown Null Shared (6 Suits)" which make Brown and Null share two stacks
• "Black Dark rainbow Shared (6 Suits)" which make Black and Dark rainbow share two stacks

. Old post:

Linked with #1746 but look better:

One of the suits must be played twice on different stacks:

• Twice (new name "Ambigious Shared"): there is six 1, four 2, four 3, four 4, two 5
• Black Twice (new name "Dark Red Red Shared"): there is four 1, three 2, three 3, three 4, two 5
• (Double Black twice (new name "[Black] Black Shared"): there is two 1, two 2, two 3, two 4, two 5: not much interresting)

And so every of those suit will get two or three stacks, so if you play: 1>2>3>1>4>2>3>5>4>5 on that color, they all will successfully play.

So per example, Twice (5 Suits) would get:

• r1 r1 r1 r2 r2 r3 r3 r4 r4 r5
• y1 y1 y1 y2 y2 y3 y3 y4 y4 y5
• g1 g1 g1 g2 g2 g3 g3 g4 g4 g5
• b1 b1 b1 b1 b1 b1 b2 b2 b2 b2 b3 b3 b3 b3 b4 b4 b4 b4 b5 b5

And stacks would be: r+y+g+b+b.

Goal is to create games with dark suit, but without the drawback of getting bottom-decked. That still require the same effeciency than dark, but those dark suit would be played way sooner.

The problem with actual notation is that you could create after a 'Rainbow Black twice' which isn't great.

Twice doesn't look interresting, it's an easier ambigious. But I believe hanab is missing more easy than normal variant anyway.

[Romain672]

I think I got a solution for the name. The 'black' or 'dark' suffixe remove: two 1, one 2, one 3, and one 4 to the suit.

That mean 'Black twice' take the attribut of twice, but with the effect of black. Then, 'Double Black' remove twice the amount, so four 1, two 2, two 3, and two 4 to the suit. From there, you can build 'Rainbow Twice' where there is two rainbow suit (with normal amount) (^) which got two stacks where you can play any of the two colors on the stacks. You can build 'Pink Brown Twice' where there is one brown and one pink suit (^) Then the 'Normal Rainbow Twice' would get one normal suit and one rainbow suit (^) The 'Normal Normal Twice' would get two normal suits (like blue and purple) (^) The 'Pink Dark Brown Twice' would get: i1, i1, i1, n1, i2, i2, n2, i3, i3, n3, i4, i4, n4, i5, n5 (^) The 'Dark Pink Brown Twice' would get: i1, n1, n1, n1, i2, n2, n2, i3, n3, n3, i4, n4, n4, i5, n5 (^)

This post only talk about long term, if that idea look great, but the name of it look coherent. The only problem of those names, is that it double the number of variants :D But I guess you could just limit to 'X twice' and 'dark X twice' if it's a problem, and not go into 'X Y twice'.

[DarthGandalf]

Which stack the card will play to? Does the player choose?

[Romain672]

Stacks are together, it doesn't matter (leftmost possible displayed). On my weird 'Pink Brown Twice', you can play i1>n2>n3>i1>n2>i4>i3>n5>n4>i5.

(Remember the aim for us is to play with at least one 'dark' suffixe, else it's easier than normal.)

[Romain672]

If #1929 is done, that would let you put all variants in the form 'X Y Twice'.

So like '[Normal] Dark Red Twice (5 Suits)'. This variant would feature red, yellow, green suit. And would have blue and dark red suit which are combined. (edit: "The equivalent of 'Dark Twice' more up." => but that's wrong, read the (V)) Then the variant 'Twice' in the first post more up would be 'Ambigious twice'. And '[Normal] [Normal] Twice (5 Suits)' would get suits red, yellow, green, and blue&purple which are combined.

That look like a nice way to do Black twice, without creating a special case for the black part. But that would mean #1929 must be done first :(

Instead, you could ignore #1929 and immediately do '[Black] Black Twice' which look the most interresting variant, but that require to do two black suit, and I don't believe it's possible atm. And that create a special case, which isn't great.

(V): the problem is that Dark red got colored with red. Black is colored with Black. To make it like 'Dark Twice' in the first post, you would need either "Dark Red Red" or to make Dark Red not take the color red but the black one.

[Romain672]

So let me summarize:

• 'Black Twice' in the first post is the most interresting variant
• 'Black Twice' require a special case for the black case because the amount of copy is different than usual
• Most variants can be wroted in the form 'X Y Twice'
• 'Black Twice' can't because no normal suit have the black color, but #1929 could make it work.
• 1. Atm, the # 1929 idea work but that would require the variant to me named 'Dark Red Red Twice', but that ask to put Red in title on variant
• 2. Alternatively, # 1929 could be done in another way (Black-Red & Black), which would make the variant here named 'Black-red Black Twice'
• 3. Alternatively, you can ignore # 1929 and just create special cases for each variant listed in the first post

Note that 1) & 2) don't work for Thrice's variants: enjoy "Dark-Red Dark-Red Red Thrice": two Dark-Red Suit doesn't work atm.

[Romain672]

So:

• if #1929 & #2613 are planned to be done, I would suggest to keep this one for later or to limit it at "[Normal] [Normal] Twice" or at "[Normal] Black Twice" but that would just combine two existing suits, not do what I wrote in the first post
• if they aren't planned, I would suggest to do this one by creating special cases (iii)

[Romain672]

Just added that in the first post: "On any variant, or on any shared variant, when u3 play, first the server check if u3 can be played on the null stack:

• if yes it play there
• if not, then the server check if the 'share' part contain the null suit:
  • if not, it bomb
  • if yes, then the server check if the card could be played on the second suit of the 'shared' part: - if not, it bomb - if yes, it play on the other stack"