Comments on StackPack

# 12 Comments. # I think this is just amazingly cool, Trevor. Can we assume you're going to add customizable StackPacks? to piecepackr?

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-10-28 23:09 UTC


Well one can already use the piecepackr API to make custom PnP? layouts or diagrams with pieces in various custom sizes (if you don't specify a size then it will default to the "standard" sizes).

I do however want to write the code myself to generate a "large" PnP layout myself but once the tiles get large enough (4" or so) you can only stick two tiles on a letter/A4 page especially since (including margins) an A4 only has about a 7 1/2" wide drawing area or so. This would be another reason 3 1/2" tiles might be the easiest to manufacture although I suspect an ideal "luxury" piecepack would be 4 1/2" or 5" and I don't necessarily want to compromise especially if I want to keep my coins/pawns diameters at least 1 3/4" for (conservative) young child safety reasons or use it with "nice" chess pieces or checkers.

I've also been thinking about minimal piecepack designs using circles/rectangles where I can make all the tiles, coins, and dice of a StackPack with just three stencils (although I think I'd want to make duplicates for increased painting speed) so I wouldn't necessarily need any labels nor good painting skills.

-- TrevorLDavis 2018-10-28 23:52 UTC


One could have three piecepacks sized such that the smallest tile fits within a quarter of the medium tile which in turn fits within a quarter of the largest tile. We could call that game system a Fractal StackPack aka FracStackPack?.

SubPack?, SuperPack?, and SuperDuperPack??

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-10-29 00:02 UTC


SuperDuperPack? is fun but if we were to take it seriously (although I personally don't really want to DIY make the really small or really big game pieces necessary to build a FracStackPack?) it should probably either be SubPack?, MedPack?/MidPack?, and SuperPack? or possibly SubPack?, SuperPack?, and UltraPack? continuing the theme of using Latin-derived English words.

-- TrevorLDavis 2018-10-29 03:41 UTC


Yeah, I was going to suggest something like SubPack? / MainPack? / SuperPack?, or maybe ZeroPack?, Pack, or plain old PiecePack for the middle piecepack. However, why stop there? A five-level piecepack could use numeric exponents like -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, and so on.

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-10-29 05:52 UTC


The thing I like about StackPack, Packtet, and DualPiecepacks is that they are all strict supersets of the standard piecepack -- they expand it without touching the original standard. In fact, they are all mutually compatible, so it's entirely possible to create a DualFracStackPacktet that greatly expands the affordances of the piecepack yet can play any of the games that require a vanilla piecepack.

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-10-29 14:38 UTC


However, why stop there? A five-level piecepack could use numeric exponents like -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, and so on. 

I'm picturing you using tweezers to move -2 coins between +2 tiles laid out on your lawn.

A DualStackPack? would give you enough subcoins to play Hexagonal Chess on a hexagonal board made from supercoins and subtiles as well as allow you to play games invented for the Sly or Realm game systems (although technically I think you can very awkwardly play game from those systems with just a single StackPack).

Interestingly just as a standard PiecePack is just one tile short of making an "international checkers" board a Packtet falls just one tile short of making a hexagonal chessboard.

-- TrevorLDavis 2018-10-29 19:26 UTC


A DualStackPacktet? probably optimizes piece variety without being too large or heavy, as a DualFracStackPacktet almost certainly is. You get two different sizes of piece, and many suits and multisuits in light and dark colors (or whatever you are using to differentiate the two sides of the dual aspect).

FFS, don't combine light and dark suits in the same multisuit (such as dark suns and light moons on the same tile). That would be over the top even for me.

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-10-30 22:28 UTC


Or maybe the DualStackPacktet? is too "long and skinny".

suits = 15 (Packtet)
values = 6 (standard)
sizes = 2 (StackPack)
groups = 2 (Dual Piecepacks)

The suits dimension is an order of magnitude bigger than any other dimension. It has more values (15) than the other three dimensions put together (6+2+2=10). Seems a bit lopsided, on reflection.

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-11-01 06:46 UTC


> The suits dimension is an order of magnitude bigger than any other dimension. It has more values (15) than the other three dimensions put together (6+2+2=10). Seems a bit lopsided, on reflection.

Well including groups you'll have 30 distinguishable suits and 28 distinguishable game tokens per suit which doesn't seem radically lopsided. Better get some nice arch punches to quickly punch out those 360 coins!

-- TrevorLDavis 2018-11-02 17:41 UTC


Yeah... 🤔 I prefer to look at all the dimensions separately. If you remove the Packtet, all the dimensions are close to one another in size, and you retain four dimensions. There is still a variety of distinguishable pieces, and there are only 96 coins to cut out. 💡

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-11-02 22:09 UTC


I'm not a big fan of the designer, but this looked relevant. Perhaps it could be played with a HexFracStackPack?. :) http://www.marksteeregames.com/Fractal_rules.pdf

-- RonHaleEvans 2018-11-04 20:51 UTC


Creative Commons License This wiki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

To save this page you must answer this question:

What kind of pet chases cats?