Having recieved the secret of Mornington Crescent from my parents, I have developed a great liking for this "game" and have been cunningly using my double-underhand-oaks to great effect... however!
To take part in any "official" game, I really need to understand some of the conventions. Basically, definitions of commin maneuvers, states etc. (e.g. loops, reversals, passes) and to what playing style they apply to - whether it's actualy rule-based, or free-form.
> Having recieved the secret of Mornington Crescent from my parents, I > have developed a great liking for this "game" and have been cunningly > using my double-underhand-oaks to great effect... however!
> To take part in any "official" game, I really need to understand some > of the conventions. Basically, definitions of commin maneuvers, states > etc. (e.g. loops, reversals, passes) and to what playing style they > apply to - whether it's actualy rule-based, or free-form.
The problem here is that there is no real standard set of rules used throughout the world. Here in Southampton, England, the common convention seems to be the British Standard Reformed ruleset, though we generally play with many optional amendments such as weekend rules. The World Championships use United International rules, but they are not recommended except for very experienced players. The "I'm Sorry, I Haven't A Clue" team still play with the now antiquated British Orthodox rules (as defined in 1927 by the National MC Players' Union), and many traditional players choose to use this ruleset.
Of course, just about all rulesets will include the standard moves such as shunt, strile, and loop, and the common states such as knip, spoon, and huff. The game wouldn't be the same without them! These days it's unusual not to include token play, spin, and LV calculations, as they increase the degree of challenge for experienced players.
-- | Harry Mason | .------------. | .___, |"Whatever you do will be | | University of | | hjm200 @ | | ___('v')___ | insignificant. However, | | Southampton | | zepler.net | | `"-\._./-"' | it is vitally important | | England | '------------' | hjm ^ ^ | that you do it." Gandhi |
> > Having recieved the secret of Mornington Crescent from my parents, I > > have developed a great liking for this "game" and have been cunningly > > using my double-underhand-oaks to great effect... however!
> > To take part in any "official" game, I really need to understand some > > of the conventions. Basically, definitions of commin maneuvers, states > > etc. (e.g. loops, reversals, passes) and to what playing style they > > apply to - whether it's actualy rule-based, or free-form.
> The problem here is that there is no real standard set of rules used > throughout the world. Here in Southampton, England, the common convention > seems to be the British Standard Reformed ruleset, though we generally play > with many optional amendments such as weekend rules. The World Championships > use United International rules, but they are not recommended except for very > experienced players. The "I'm Sorry, I Haven't A Clue" team still play with > the now antiquated British Orthodox rules (as defined in 1927 by the National > MC Players' Union), and many traditional players choose to use this ruleset.
> Of course, just about all rulesets will include the standard moves such as > shunt, strile, and loop, and the common states such as knip, spoon, and huff. > The game wouldn't be the same without them! These days it's unusual not to > include token play, spin, and LV calculations, as they increase the degree of > challenge for experienced players.
That's a nice summary, but you've not really explained much, have you. :) Anyway let me explain how the standard moves work. For this example, I'm going to assume that all players have equal and constant LV and spin (obviously this never happens in play, but it's the best way to explain the concepts).
Obviously it's important to note the similarities and differences between moves such at the Shunt and the Strile. Both manoeuvres require you to have a low spin, but the Shunt works best with a high LV, whereas the strile is best suited to low LV.
Anyway, Harry has failed to mention the cannon, possibly the most useful defensive play tactic in use in modern MC. Obviously there are only certain situations where this is a valid move (You can work this out from your LV coefficients table) but when employed it can have overwhelming results.
For example:
In this example, there are four players, who we'll call North, East, South and West. Their current status is as follows, and they play in the order above
North: Bethnal Green, LV: 3.27, Spin 1.25c East: Tower Hill (Attached to the District line) LV: 5.46, Spin 0.75a South: Camden Town, LV: 0.23, Spin 0.00 West: Mile End (Unattached), LV: 1.02, Spin 1.00a
North moves to Holborn, thus opening one of the diagonals, but opening an attack vector too.
East moves to Liverpool Street, blocking North's return on the Central line and restricting Zone 2 play.
South then moves to Kings Cross, St. Pancras to place the Northern Line in knip, preventing all players from exiting via this route.
West attaches to the H & C line, but moves on Central, towards Liverpool Street. The result is that East is moved to Holborn and shunts North to Greenford (this is the cannon), but as East has such a high LV, they continue to move to West Acton.
This is only a short example, but you can see clearly how West has improved their position greatly, by virtue of this stunt. It should also be pointed out that I have not taken token play into account, as this would have opened up new possibilities. Additionally, had East chosen to Bifurcate, then the resulting overall LV would have unlocked the Piccadilly line and modified the shunt parametrics.
Hopefully this should be fairly clear to anyone with a reasonable understanding of the basics. I recommend purchasing a copy of the latest BSR Basic ruleset, (dated June 2002, as I recall), but they're getting harder to come by these days. If you can't find this, then Simmond's Mornington Crescent Advanced game draws most of its groundwork from BSR, so the first few chapters of the Simmond rulebook are very rewarding reading for the novice seeking proficiency.
> The problem here is that there is no real standard set of rules used > throughout the world. Here in Southampton, England, the common convention > seems to be the British Standard Reformed ruleset, though we generally play > with many optional amendments such as weekend rules. The World Championships > use United International rules, but they are not recommended except for very > experienced players. The "I'm Sorry, I Haven't A Clue" team still play with > the now antiquated British Orthodox rules (as defined in 1927 by the National > MC Players' Union), and many traditional players choose to use this ruleset.
> Of course, just about all rulesets will include the standard moves such as > shunt, strile, and loop, and the common states such as knip, spoon, and huff. > The game wouldn't be the same without them! These days it's unusual not to > include token play, spin, and LV calculations, as they increase the degree of > challenge for experienced players.
In that case, could you (or someone else, for that matter) explain the aforementioned moves, states and suchlike. The only one I understand is Nidd where you can't move for three turns, but I think that's just Knip with a different name (incidentally, I spent a holiday near the river Nidd)
Ho-hurrrrm. Well, either you're all making it up as you go, in true MC style, or I know less than I thought! What exaclty is line velocity (apart from speed) and how is it worked out? Ditto for spin.
In the meantime I shall carry on using Middler's original rules with Thimble's 2nd amendments.
On 18 Aug 2003 11:00:43 -0700, Fish-face <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ho-hurrrrm. Well, either you're all making it up as you go, in true MC > style, or I know less than I thought! What exaclty is line velocity > (apart from speed) and how is it worked out? Ditto for spin.
> In the meantime I shall carry on using Middler's original rules with > Thimble's 2nd amendments.
Well, let's face it, the rules for all games are made up. Somebody has to make them, so MC is no different from any other game, except that there are an awful lot more rulesets for MC than most other games!
> Well, let's face it, the rules for all games are made up. Somebody has to make > them, so MC is no different from any other game, except that there are an awful > lot more rulesets for MC than most other games!
There is that, although I haven't played another game where the rules change *quite* so frequently! In any case, that answer, although truthful, doesn't answer my question :) So, uhm, LV? Spin? how to work out/work with? And the same for virtually every other Mornington Crescent term mentioned so far :D If they're just numbers that one randomly invents on the spot, I can live with that, and, until such a time as hear otherwise, I shall have to play with them as that!
On 19 Aug 2003 07:00:32 -0700, Fish-face <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> There is that, although I haven't played another game where the rules > change *quite* so frequently!
The rules rarely (if ever) change in-game, more likely, people are playing with their own house rules (This is very common in MC). Again, there are many different rulesets and not all are necessarily compatible.
> In any case, that answer, although truthful, doesn't answer my > question :) So, uhm, LV? Spin? how to work out/work with? And the same > for virtually every other Mornington Crescent term mentioned so far :D > If they're just numbers that one randomly invents on the spot, I can > live with that, and, until such a time as hear otherwise, I shall have > to play with them as that!
Well, obviously LV is your line velocity and spin is the rotational component of the LV. You calculate them using the standard equations of motion, based on your displacement vectors (Starting and terminating stations, and any stations between where you need to change, taking into account the Central line exceptions)
Many players have found they can make them up on the spot as most players are too lazy to verify the maths, and often lose track of the other players, but this is considered cheating by the powers that be and is forbidden in any UK championship match.
Initial LV and spin are random, but based on your chosen start location, the formula to calculate initial spin and LV, as well as token distribution and travel coefficients is available in any good MC rulebook.
> Well, obviously LV is your line velocity and spin is the rotational component > of the LV. You calculate them using the standard equations of motion, based > on your displacement vectors (Starting and terminating stations, and any > stations between where you need to change, taking into account the Central > line exceptions)
> Many players have found they can make them up on the spot as most players are > too lazy to verify the maths, and often lose track of the other players, but > this is considered cheating by the powers that be and is forbidden in any UK > championship match.
> Initial LV and spin are random, but based on your chosen start location, the > formula to calculate initial spin and LV, as well as token distribution and > travel coefficients is available in any good MC rulebook.
That makes sense! (I think...) I assume that LV and spin affect various factors of gameplay, and restrict them in some way: how?
On 20 Aug 2003 02:35:26 -0700, Fish-face <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> That makes sense! (I think...) I assume that LV and spin affect > various factors of gameplay, and restrict them in some way: how?
I'd have thought that would be fairly obvious, if you don't have enough speed, then you can't travel very far... Spin affects your direction of travel at any given set of points.
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:36:58 +0100, Jamie <jay...@hornbeam.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In article <32ca54ec.0308200135.708f7...@posting.google.com>, Fish-face > <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> writes > [shakes head slowly in disbelief...]
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:36:58 +0100, Jamie <jay...@hornbeam.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > In article <32ca54ec.0308200135.708f7...@posting.google.com>, Fish-face > > <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> writes > > [shakes head slowly in disbelief...] > [Frowns, with a look of confusion on face...]
In article <slrnbk9qgk.2l0.apl...@orbital.ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Andrew Paul Landells <apl...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> writes
>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:36:58 +0100, Jamie <jay...@hornbeam.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> In article <32ca54ec.0308200135.708f7...@posting.google.com>, Fish-face >> <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> writes >> [shakes head slowly in disbelief...] >[Frowns, with a look of confusion on face...]
Perhaps you'd better enquire further in here, I'm sure you'll get reams of sincere and helpful advice... [smiles faintly with ambivalent providence]
One Ruleset you appear to have overlooked is the controversial Longleat Accord. This was introduced for the now abandoned Home Nations Series (1957-1974). As a result of the Northern Ireland teams protests concerning their under-representation on the Great British Olympic MC Commitee, a meeting was held at Longleat and the controversial Vann-Hoff rule was implemented. Ironically this backfired on the very person who most pushed for the rules introduction, Northern Ireland's controversial captain and one time World Champion, William McFarlane. During the Northern Ireland Vs Scotland match he was positively stumped by the previously unheard of call of Bristol Templemeads (only allowable under the Van-Hoff rule). his only move was East Acton leading straight to Mornington Crescent for Cameron McVey for Scotland. Luckily the rule and the longleat Accord are merely MC history after the Home Nations Series was abandoned in 1974. Although it still proves that knowing all rulesets can give the scholarly MC competitor a big advantage.
Hope this helps rather than confuses the newer more amateur readers. For a better explanation you could do worse than Mornington Crescent Made Easy (ISBN 4537353-3463)
<jay...@hornbeam.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In article <slrnbk9qgk.2l0.apl...@orbital.ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Andrew Paul >Landells <apl...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> writes >>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:36:58 +0100, Jamie <jay...@hornbeam.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>> In article <32ca54ec.0308200135.708f7...@posting.google.com>, Fish-face >>> <fish_face99...@hotmail.com> writes >>> [shakes head slowly in disbelief...] >>[Frowns, with a look of confusion on face...] >Perhaps you'd better enquire further in here, I'm sure you'll get reams >of sincere and helpful advice... >[smiles faintly with ambivalent providence]
