2026-09-07 10:18:25
Anonymous:
Districts r10 (CAM103): run the revisit audit Tasks asks for against my own baseline first, before defending its count. New section 5.1 states the test - a revisit earns a baseline place only if it changes a persistent state, poses a problem the earlier visit could not, or requires being there rather than reading an answer - and applies it to my two required returns. The darkened-district trip FAILS all three and is cut: the trunk-permission clue is an observation, the player is already going to that district for its own reasons, and making it a separate expedition was counting a beat as a trip. The Collector-after-the-Barrier return passes all three and is kept, with the reason stated. Baseline falls from 35 expeditions / 8.4 h to 34 / 8.1, and every figure in section 5 including the consolidated table moves with it (10.1-11.0 with overhead; 42 expeditions and 12.6-13.7 for everything designed) - these went down because a trip was cut, not because an estimate was revised, which is the direction a content-derived number is supposed to move. Supports REV105-1's repair on the Lead's Tram as the same test failing on condition 2, and explicitly declines to write that scene, offering instead one geographical fact the repair can use: the Tram is the only district on the recommended route whose objective sits at the far end of a one-way climb. Also closes section 3.4's deferral - WLD104 r26 has chosen the recommended route.
hold the flood/districts.md ..
@@ 1,6 1,6 @@
# Hold the Flood — Districts
-
**CAM101 accepted; CAM102 / CAM103 · r9 · 2026-09-07 · Campaign and District Designer · In review. Nothing here is an owner approval, a validated length, or tested behaviour.** r9 answers [PMR007 §4](/Hold%20the%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR007), the ordering conflict between this page's route and WLD104's evidence chain: **§3.4 shows that the Collector is already reachable directly from the pumping district**, so World's Collector-first chain needs no new branch and no re-ordering — what it needed was for this page to say plainly that the numbered route is a recommendation and not a gate. Records the CAM102 corrections delivered on the district pages and the CAM103 coordination that follows. r1–r8 are in [page history](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Districts/history).
+
**CAM101 accepted; CAM102 / CAM103 · r10 · 2026-09-07 · Campaign and District Designer · In review. Nothing here is an owner approval, a validated length, or tested behaviour.** r10 is the CAM103 audit Tasks asks for — *identify any baseline trip whose only purpose is hauling or repeating a solved interaction; cut, combine or redesign it* — run against my own baseline first. **One of the two required returns fails the test and is cut**, so the baseline falls to **34 expeditions and 8.1 hours** and every figure in §5 moves with it. New §5.1 states the test, applies it, and supports [REV105-1](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Design%20Review) on the Tram without writing a competing version of the lead's district. §3.4's deferral to World is closed: WLD104 r26 has chosen the recommended route. r1–r9 are in [page history](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Districts/history).
**This page does not replace [Campaign (DES104)](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Campaign).** The lead published the integrated campaign proposal before this role was staffed, and its own bookkeeping says section 2's map and count and section 3's districts "would transfer to Campaign and Districts" when the role exists. It exists now. **I adopt the lead's seven-plus-one district set and its three deep districts as written, rather than proposing a rival campaign** — two campaign plans on one wiki is the failure [Wiki Conventions §6](/Wiki%20Conventions) is about. What this page adds is the part of CAM101 that DES104 does not yet carry: an independent count test, the progression map with its optional branch and its later-discovery return, travel and order rules, a bottom-up duration hypothesis, one consequence of failure, one alternative route, and the two undesigned districts written to the standard of DES104 §3.
@@ 158,7 158,9 @@
**What that gives World, in the terms PMR007 asks for.** A player who takes Pumping → Collector second meets the meters before they have any explanation for them: the reading available then is *"the city moves the Flood and takes something off it as it passes"*, and the action it changes is immediate and local — they start shutting ways-on to thin a district's first surge, without knowing what the charge is for. The Lock Flight and Tram explanations then arrive as **why**, and the revised action is that the same ways-on become a way to buy a quiet window for a specific job in a specific district, rather than a general softening. A player who takes the other order gets the explanation first and the meters as confirmation, and their ways-on are deliberate from the first use. **Both are complete; they differ in whether the player's first month at the Collector was superstition or method**, which is the kind of difference a mystery campaign should want and not the kind it should prevent.
-
**The one thing I will not do is make the orders equivalent.** If World needs the Collector-first reading to be the canonical one, the honest change is to *recommend* it in §3.1 rather than to claim both routes teach the same thing. That is a WLD104/CAM103 decision and I would take World's preference over my own here, because the evidence chain is theirs and the numbering is only mine.
+
**The one thing I will not do is make the orders equivalent.** If World needs the Collector-first reading to be the canonical one, the honest change is to *recommend* it in §3.1 rather than to claim both routes teach the same thing. That was a WLD104/CAM103 decision and I said I would take World's preference over my own, because the evidence chain is theirs and the numbering is only mine.
+
+
**Closed: World chose the recommended route.** [WLD104 r26](/Hold%20the%20Flood/World%20And%20Mystery) re-orders the chain onto it, keying the campaign's turns to the Exchange's found bank state and to the Collector's intake-gauge-against-outfall-meter difference — both of which are the district pages' own observables, so nothing on either side had to be invented to make the orders agree. §3.1's numbering stands as the recommendation, and the table above stands as what the map actually allows.
## 4. The progression map: main route, an optional discovery, and a later discovery that changes an earlier return
@@ 215,11 217,11 @@
| **The Collector** | **4** | 1 the levels and the meters. 2 the three ways-on, and one surge withheld. 3 the harvest, the winch, and what charge is for here. 4 the intake gauge | 60 |
| **Tidal Barrier** | **4** | 1 the tide read against the dispatch clock. 2 the flats crossing and the signal house. 3 the gate log. 4 the gates shut | 48 |
| **The Head-works** | **3** | 1 the approach and the gallery door. 2 the grease, the tally and the cadence. 3 the governor | 54 |
-
| **Required return: a darkened district, watched** | **1** | The campaign clue that the trunk *permits* dispatch is only observable in a district you have darkened. Without it the Exchange is a lever with no legible effect, so this is required, not optional | 15 |
+
| ~~Required return: a darkened district, watched~~ | **0** | **Cut at r10** — the trunk-permission clue is an observation, and the player is already going to a darkened district for its own reasons. The beat now happens inside that ordinary visit. See §5.1 | 0 |
| **Required return: the Collector, after the Barrier** | **1** | Shutting the gates starves it; its level and gauges have to be re-read before the head-works run | 15 |
-
| **Baseline total** | **35** | | **502** |
+
| **Baseline total** | **34** | | **487** |
-
**The baseline path is 35 expeditions and 8.4 hours of expedition time.** (r3 said 34 and 8.2; the Exchange has gained one expedition by acquiring a real beat list at [its own page](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Districts/The%20Exchange), which is the only honest direction for a number to move when a sketch becomes a design.) Every deferral and every optional branch that was in r1's "required" column has been taken out of it.
+
**The baseline path is 34 expeditions and 8.1 hours of expedition time.** (r3 said 34 and 8.2, r5–r9 said 35 and 8.4; the Exchange gained one expedition by acquiring a real beat list at [its own page](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Districts/The%20Exchange), which is the only honest direction for a number to move when a sketch becomes a design.) Every deferral and every optional branch that was in r1's "required" column has been taken out of it.
**Where this differs from the lead, and why I moved.** r1 gave the pumping district 5–8 expeditions; [DES104 §8](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Campaign#8-length-honestly) carries the lead's estimate of 10–12 from that district's own designed beats. **I have adopted the lead's number at its low end.** I had no evidence for a lower one — my reasoning was that a campaign opening should be tighter, which is a preference, not a beat list, and the lead has the beat list. Where two roles differ on a number, the one who wrote the beats should win.
@@ 230,6 232,33 @@
**The stale pointer r5 flagged is resolved, by its author.** r5 noted that DES104 §8 still described the duration as unaccepted after PMR006 had accepted it, and left the fix to the lead rather than editing another author's page. [DES104 r4](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Campaign) §8 now states the baseline itself — thirty-five expeditions and about eight and a half hours of authored beats, optional and overhead printed apart, deaths and hauling excluded — and cites this page for it. **That is the interface working the way it should: flag on your own page, and let the owner of the text fix the text.** Nothing further is outstanding here.
+
### 5.1 What makes a revisit worth taking — the test, and my own baseline audited against it
+
+
*This is the audit [Tasks CAM103](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Tasks) asks for: "identify any baseline trip whose only purpose is hauling or repeating a solved interaction; cut, combine or redesign it." [PMR007 §2](/Hold%20the%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR007) puts it in one line — "cut a supply-observation trip if the player already knows its answer and has no new objective or useful state to change" — and [REV105-1](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Design%20Review) has just found one on the lead's Tram. The right response to a finding like that is not to defend my own count, so I ran the test here first.*
+
+
**The test. A revisit earns a place on the baseline path only if it has at least one of:**
+
+
1. **A state the player changes**, which persists and which they could not have set on the earlier visit.
+
2. **A problem the earlier visit could not pose**, because something elsewhere in the campaign has since changed what the rule can do there.
+
3. **An objective that requires being there**, rather than an answer that could be read anywhere.
+
+
**A trip that has none of these is an observation, and an observation is a beat, not an expedition.** It belongs inside a trip the player was taking anyway.
+
+
**Applying it to my own two required returns.**
+
+
| Required return | Test | Verdict |
+
| --- | --- | --- |
+
| **A darkened district, watched** — to observe that the trunk *permits* dispatch | Changes no state. Poses no new problem: the district is as it was, minus its announcement. Requires being there only to *look* | **Fails all three. Cut.** |
+
| **The Collector, after the Barrier** — starvation has changed it | Changes state: the ways-on and the level are set here, and they decide whether the head race is walkable for the [race route](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Districts/The%20Head-works). Poses a problem the first visit could not: a starved Collector is a different district. Requires being there | **Passes 1, 2 and 3. Kept.** |
+
+
**So the darkened-district trip is cut, and the clue survives without it.** The observation was always going to happen anyway: the player darkens a district *in order to work it more easily* ([§4](#4-the-progression-map-main-route-an-optional-discovery-and-a-later-discovery-that-changes-an-earlier-return)), and when they get there the flash that does not come is the first thing they see. **Making it a separate expedition was me counting a beat as a trip**, and it inflated the baseline by one expedition and fifteen minutes. The baseline is now 34 and 8.1 hours, and §5's tables carry that.
+
+
**This is the direction a content-derived number is supposed to move.** It went up at r5 when the Exchange earned a beat list and down at r10 when a trip failed a test. If it only ever went up, it would not be an estimate.
+
+
**On [REV105-1](/Hold%20the%20Flood/Design%20Review), which is the same finding on the lead's district.** The critic's diagnosis — that the Tram's later return is the first visit unopposed, with its new tool exercised only in a contingency the written path avoids — is the test above failing on condition 2: the problem the earlier visit posed has been *removed* by the player's own Collector hold and by the heavy stepping off the rail, and nothing has replaced it. **Their minimal repair is the right one and I support it**: make the contingency the main line, so the objective requires staying through a second dispatch rather than leaving before it.
+
+
**I am not writing that scene.** [PMR007 §2](/Hold%20the%20Flood/PM%20Reviews/PMR007) is explicit that the lead owns one integrated first/changed/later return for the Tram and that this role supplies geography with attribution, and a competing version is the last thing that district needs. What I can offer is the test, and one geographical fact the repair can use if it wants it: **the Tram is the only district on the recommended route whose objective sits at the far end of a one-way climb**, so "leave before the second dispatch" and "finish the job" are naturally in tension there in a way they are not anywhere else. If the lead wants the contingency to be the main line, the geography already argues for it.
+
### Optional — listed, and added to nothing
| Optional branch | Expeditions | Min |
@@ 252,13 281,13 @@
| What | Expeditions | Hours |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
-
| Authored beats on the baseline path, expedition time only | 35 | **8.4** |
-
| Baseline path with dock overhead applied (unmeasured 25–35% assumption) | 35 | **10.5–11.3** |
+
| Authored beats on the baseline path, expedition time only | 34 | **8.1** |
+
| Baseline path with dock overhead applied (unmeasured 25–35% assumption) | 34 | **10.1–11.0** |
| Optional branches, expedition time only | 8 | 2.0 |
| Optional branches with the same overhead | 8 | 2.5–2.7 |
-
| **Everything designed, with overhead** | **43** | **13.0–14.0** |
+
| **Everything designed, with overhead** | **42** | **12.6–13.7** |
-
**So the honest span is about eight and a half hours of authored beats, ten to eleven for a player who does the baseline path, and thirteen to fourteen for one who does everything designed.** Deaths, retries and hauling are excluded from every row and are not campaign length. **The only measured figure in this table is zero of them**; the expedition counts come from printed beat lists, the overhead is an assumption stated as one, and all of it belongs to a phase that has not been authorised.
+
**So the honest span is about eight hours of authored beats, ten to eleven for a player who does the baseline path, and about thirteen for one who does everything designed.** These figures moved down at r10 because a trip was cut, not because an estimate was revised: **the way this number should change is by content changing.** Deaths, retries and hauling are excluded from every row and are not campaign length. **The only measured figure in this table is zero of them**; the expedition counts come from printed beat lists, the overhead is an assumption stated as one, and all of it belongs to a phase that has not been authorised.
**And the three parts of criterion 11 that X33 finds missing are not Campaign's to supply.** Which player the game serves, what specific experience offers value, and the evidence behind commercial positioning are the integrated owner document's, which is the lead's, with the External Critic on the evidence and PM on whether it is deferred. **This role supplies the length and nothing else about the product**, and it should not be read as having an opinion on price or shelf by supplying an hour count. If positioning is restated, the rows above are what it should be restated against; if it is deferred, this page has no objection and no standing to have one.
