2026-09-09 10:59:24
Anonymous:
Global04 alignment: demote page to historical comparison, mark unadopted shipward-collar reconnection and old Option 2 recommendation historical, point to current persistent-group contract
hold the flood/shifting station options.md ..
@@ 1,6 1,6 @@
# Hold The Horde — Shifting Station Options
-
**Status.** The owner selected **Option 3: certain actions bind rooms into groups that stay connected through shifts**, and added that connecting the **entire station** this way should be one of the deepest and latest puzzles. The other options below remain the comparison that informed that choice. Old fixed-layout rules are superseded. The exact binding action, eligible connections, handling of mistakes and completed-station shift behaviour still need design. The example's special rescue reconnection and shift timing remain proposals; the owner did not adopt them with the choice. Alive-return behaviour, implementation, time travel, divine cause and resurrection consequences are not selected here.
+
**Status.** The owner selected **Option 3: certain actions bind rooms into groups that stay connected through shifts**, and added that connecting the **entire station** this way should be one of the deepest and latest puzzles. The other options below remain the comparison that informed that choice. Old fixed-layout rules are superseded. The exact binding action, eligible connections, handling of mistakes and completed-station shift behaviour still need design. **This page is now the historical comparison that informed the choice, not current rules.** Its shared example below — including the compact rescue assembly reconnecting to a marked shipward collar, and the old Option 2 recommendation — is superseded and must not be read as a current guarantee of shipward adjacency after a shift. The current contract is the owner-selected persistent-group direction developed in [Connecting The Station](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Connecting%20The%20Station) and the accepted conditional candidate in [Death Shift and Rescue Continuity](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Death%20Shift%20And%20Rescue%20Continuity). Neither the protected retreat nor layout stabilisation is an owner requirement. Alive-return behaviour, implementation, time travel, divine cause and resurrection consequences are not selected here.
## Shared example and interfaces
@@ 10,10 10,10 @@
- Everything still carried returns with the astronaut. The installed Fork remains the same object in the same controller; no copy returns.
- Yeva is alive, unsent and in her completed safe state. Death neither kills nor automatically sends her.
-
- Booth, crossing, vestibule and endpoint form one **compact rescue assembly**. This local condition is not general teleportation: after shifting, it reconnects to a marked shipward collar. The player chooses to return, cross at most that room and complete transfer.
+
- Booth, crossing, vestibule and endpoint form one **compact rescue assembly**. *(Historical example.)* This old comparison had it reconnect after shifting to a marked shipward collar. **That reconnection was never adopted and is not current:** under the accepted candidate a compact assembly keeps its internal pose but its external neighbours may change, only the R01 ship-rooted group is anchored, and no next-shift access to the ship is promised.
- Journal observations retain object identity, visible evidence and completed states. Every recorded adjacency is stamped **historical after death**. It can identify Blue Ward or D-17, but cannot draw today’s route there.
-
Exact shift timing is proposed as: preserve completed checkpoints and placed objects, return carried property, rearrange the station, then revive the astronaut aboard. Alive-return behavior remains open.
+
Exact shift timing was proposed here as: preserve completed checkpoints and placed objects, return carried property, rearrange the station, then revive the astronaut aboard. The accepted candidate keeps that property-first order and specifies the steps around it, including where an in-transfer survivor is resolved; read it there rather than here. No shift orientation or algorithm should be derived from this legacy page.
## Option 1 — Whole districts change neighbours
@@ 53,6 53,6 @@
## Recommendation
-
Start with **Option 2: recognisable rooms changing neighbours**, plus the compact-rescue exception. It best preserves uncertainty while keeping object states and records truthful. The accepted cost is faster route-knowledge depreciation, demanding current cues and greater content/state burden.
+
*(Historical recommendation, superseded by the owner's selection of Option 3.)* This comparison recommended starting with **Option 2: recognisable rooms changing neighbours**, plus the compact-rescue exception. It best preserves uncertainty while keeping object states and records truthful. The accepted cost is faster route-knowledge depreciation, demanding current cues and greater content/state burden.
Option 1 is the safer fallback if repeated room searches overwhelm discovery. Option 3 is the richer later alternative if the owner wants permanent work to shape geography itself and accepts the risk of map optimisation. These are design expectations, not evidence of fun, clarity, variety or production feasibility.
