2026-09-09 11:41:52
Anonymous:
Refresh current scope ledger and unauthorized first evidence packet (chat 534)
hold the flood/development and validation handoff.md ..
@@ 6,7 6,7 @@
## The next phase should answer a few consequential questions
-
The proposed first playable experiment is one small expedition with an observation that changes a later use, two contrasting legal rigs, an ordinary crowd, a mechanism, a return/death and one local shift. Its size is an evidence scope, not a promised vertical slice or final opening. Use the current selected opening direction and existing free assets only when their use is appropriate and authorized. It should expose the central tradeoffs before the team authors an entire campaign around them.
+
The proposed first bounded implementation/evidence packet uses the existing **R01 Dock Mouth → R02 Cargo Turn ⇄ R03 Collar Control** opening, E01/P01, the one Fork and isolation bridge, the four-part opening rig, current oxygen/capacity quantities and two deliberately different legal configurations. A second authored local arrangement exposes existing **R09 Release Walk** at R01's changed free frontier after death while preserving the compact R02/R03 group. Its size is an evidence scope, not a promised vertical slice, a new content slice or final opening. It should expose the discovery/build/crowd/persistence tradeoffs before the team authors or implements an entire campaign around them.
Do not build that experiment yet. Finish a readable core contract, identify the exact unresolved alternatives it would compare, and give the owner a concrete implementation scope and estimate first. A full v1 wiki is needed for a complete development handoff, but a separately bounded early experiment could be authorized before v1 if its dependencies are sufficiently specified. Neither waiting for every detail nor assuming early authorization is the default.
@@ 24,7 24,7 @@
| **2. Can players read and control meaningful horde combat?** | Specify valid automatic targets, manual special inputs, warnings, cover, displacement and local causes of arrivals. Preserve clean victories by strong builds. | Observe the same crowd under two different legal builds and readable density conditions, including a warned special enemy or trap. Compare what players believed would happen with actual targeting and interruption. | If automatic targeting defeats intended positioning, revise targeting/feedback before adding mandatory manual ordinary fire. If cues vanish in density, reduce or separate competing effects. Enemy health alone does not resolve unreadable causes. |
| **2. Do language clues support a warranted change of belief?** | For each representative chain, list observed evidence, competing readings, the discriminating action, correction route and useful later consequence. Separate an operational response from proof of a request, person or god. | Test a small chain with unfamiliar real players; record hypotheses before and after evidence and whether they can use the result in another context without being told its answer. | If the chain supports several meanings equally, strengthen discriminating evidence or retain honest ambiguity. If players solve by interface labels rather than observation, revise those labels or the learning objective. Agent agreement about a fictional sentence is not player evidence. |
| **2. Does one short rescue create interest in a person and life aboard?** | Resolve one specific living/abort/death crossing contract and write a motive, disagreement and later contribution for the selected survivor. Preserve the owner's short-rescue direction. | Observe the bounded rescue and a short later home interaction. Ask what the player remembers, expects and wants to do with that person; measure the actual crossing burden rather than calling it short. | If the person is remembered only as a mechanical unlock or the rescue feels like an escort chore, change character interaction and crossing before extending the cast. Do not create survivor mortality or a colony upkeep tax merely to manufacture concern. |
-
| **2. Can essential information work through the chosen accessible controls and cues?** | Produce the cue/interaction inventory from [Player Information](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Player%20Information), including alternative channels, input options and unavailable/unconfirmed states. Keep factual limits equivalent. | After implementation authorization, inspect the actual supported input/display modes and evaluate relevant tasks with real consenting players, including people who use the intended accessibility options. Define representative devices and conditions before claiming coverage. | If a cue only works through one unavailable channel, add a useful equivalent without revealing hidden routes, translations or conclusions. A simulator, checklist, narrated agent walkthrough or a second visual cue cannot by itself establish accessibility. |
+
| **2. Can essential information work through the chosen accessible controls and cues?** | Produce the cue/interaction inventory from [Player Information And Options](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Player%20Information%20And%20Options), including alternative channels, input options and unavailable/unconfirmed states. Keep factual limits equivalent. | After implementation authorization, inspect the actual supported input/display modes and evaluate relevant tasks with real consenting players, including people who use the intended accessibility options. Define representative devices and conditions before claiming coverage. | If a cue only works through one unavailable channel, add a useful equivalent without revealing hidden routes, translations or conclusions. A simulator, checklist, narrated agent walkthrough or a second visual cue cannot by itself establish accessibility. |
| **3. Do successive expeditions continue to offer new discoveries and build decisions?** | Specify a representative sequence with connected objectives, meaningful revisits, clue consequences and part acquisition. Record the different decisions each return is intended to unlock; keep repetition and adjacency-hunting risks visible. | Once the required content and phase are authorized, observe real players across that sequence: what understanding and builds change, why they choose another objective, what earlier knowledge they reuse, and where repetition replaces a new decision. Keep this player evidence separate from authoring-cost and hardware measurements. | If novelty or build choices run out, reopen reuse, gates, acquisition cadence or the content band before expansion. Mixed results call for a narrower comparison of the suspected cause, not a favorable average that hides it. A positive result supports this sequence and these players only; it does not establish the full campaign's depth or the30/90/100–200-hour ambitions. |
| **3. Can the finite campaign be authored and run within a chosen production scope?** | Deduplicate the SMALL inventory, name reuse and state complexity, identify asset categories and target-platform constraints, and prepare explicit scope cuts. | After authorization, author representative room/puzzle/encounter/cast content through the actual pipeline and measure revision burden. Run representative technical workloads on specified target hardware, including hordes, connected builds, shifts and save state. | If content or technical cost is too high, cut repeated variants or simplify costly systems before extrapolating to the campaign. Re-estimate using actual distinct work and reuse. External game length, agent writing speed and room counts do not demonstrate our playtime or performance. |
@@ 40,12 40,70 @@
Before a trial begins, choose operational measures and decision thresholds appropriate to its question. Do not invent a universal pass percentage now or set success criteria after seeing favorable results. Small qualitative sessions identify problems and hypotheses; they do not support precise population claims. Use representative differences rather than recruiting a quota that cannot answer the question. No recruitment or contact with testers is currently assigned.
-
## First handoff packet
+
## Proposed first bounded implementation/evidence packet — unauthorized
-
The packet must name its owner, exact design revisions, intended player decisions, included/excluded states, equipment/content/assets, target conditions, open assumptions, implementation and evaluation work, stop criteria and output artifacts. Include both a normal case and a plausible failure/recovery case. For any comparison, say what differs and keep irrelevant changes limited enough to interpret the result. Keep a path to reject or simplify the proposal; the purpose is to reduce uncertainty rather than confirm the team's favorite design.
+
This packet is concrete enough for a future owner phase decision, but **no implementation, prototype, simulation, technical test, asset work, recruitment or player session is authorized now**.
-
Full-v1 readiness additionally requires every major area in [Design Coverage](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Coverage) to have an actual first-pass design and compatible interfaces. This evidence plan does not close the separate save/authoring contract, content inventory, asset suitability review or detailed campaign specification.
+
### Revision-specific dependency set
-
**Planning estimate for this first-pass plan:** PM authoring4–8 role-hours, one independent review2–3 and one author response1–2; total7–13. This narrower first pass contributes to the outline's original6–12-hour authoring allowance; do not add both in full. Later completion of the v1-specific handoff packet needs a fresh remaining-work estimate once its sources and implementation scope exist. Technical implementation, test execution, recruitment, assets, player sessions and detailed production planning are excluded and unestimated here. These are planning allowances, not measured labor or calendar turnaround.
- [Station Room And Module Inventory](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Station%20Room%20And%20Module%20Inventory) `011a4f7ba0d3b93d599ce83dc71429ed352e46546da2067cc690aacf33db5648`.
+
- [Encounter And Mechanism Placement Inventory](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Encounter%20And%20Mechanism%20Placement%20Inventory) `4b40819edce940526fa5b1687840651652b2acc7010379f2df1b9a5ed232d41a`.
+
- [Player Information And Options](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Player%20Information%20And%20Options) `9ca194c21bb72a0dc0eb83f3c11237a5287b418040c4293612407212126397dc`.
+
- [Death Shift And Rescue Continuity](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Death%20Shift%20And%20Rescue%20Continuity) `2ccdd7b3f7245dce3638caa91bd19697f215ebc2a4ab795c1f91531128044c48`.
+
- [Mechanical Interfaces And Opening Quantities](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Mechanical%20Interfaces%20And%20Opening%20Quantities) `2e604fc2f31cf044237ae622658a110f34f2d40f4793f9f1bba455ef6c21697e`.
-
The wiki v1 forecast remains22 September2026, likely18–29 September. There is no authorized development start date or defensible date for validated full-game completion. Estimate the next permitted experiment when a concrete scope and available development team can be reviewed, rather than transferring a documentation forecast onto game production.
+
Campaign36 is not a packet dependency: its evidence crosswalk is still under focused correction. This packet uses only the already accepted R-3 window observation and its stated limit; it does not copy the pending evidence-entry count.
+
+
### Player decisions and included content
+
+
The future packet would implement only these existing definitions and states:
+
+
1. **Prepare.** At the ship, choose the proposed retrieval-ready or air-heavy manifest under 10 C/4 A, with the four opening parts, one or two 8 O canisters and the 12 O suit. The display separates C, A, exact O and the player-set reserve defaulting to 4 O.
+
2. **Observe and choose at R02.** Read the board outputs, P01 preview, Fork location, bridge size and noisy final stage. Choose either:
+
- keep **Threat Sensor → Pulse Projector** automatic fire and **Manual Trigger → Barrier Plate**, then install Fork in the board so rack and shutter hold; or
+
- reclaim and fit Fork as **Sensor → Fork → Projector + Barrier**, moving Manual Trigger inactive, losing manual Barrier timing and leaving the infrastructure selector to hold only one branch.
+
The one independent ordinary-launch rule, world-time edit and carried-versus-installed cost stay visible.
+
3. **Act under E01 pressure.** Two separated Pressers, one Caller and P01 supply the accepted finite crowd. Automatic Projector fire, deliberate Barrier use, the Caller warning, the noisy fastener and the option to cut/dog/withdraw create a meaningful crowd/work decision. The journal fully pauses oxygen, enemies, warnings, readiness and work without completing any of them.
+
4. **Commit or withdraw.** Completed fasteners, alarm/dog work, board state, Fork location and bridge location persist. The player may extract the 2 C bridge, leave it, or retreat after a checkpoint. Oxygen transfer, breathing and reserve cues use the accepted proposed arithmetic without claiming balance.
+
5. **Return or die and revisit.** A living return keeps the current arrangement. A death returns every still-carried object once, leaves installed Fork and uncollected bridge at their actual locations, keeps spent gas spent, loses only an unfinished stage and shifts once. R01 remains fixed; R02/R03 remain a compact pair; the limited alternate places existing R09 Release Walk at R01's free frontier to demonstrate changed unbound adjacency without pretending to solve the 40-room generator or implementing R09's wider O3 dependencies.
+
+
**Normal case.** Install Fork in R02, finish enough work to free and carry the bridge, survive to R01, and return alive. Revisit in the same arrangement to see exact committed work and reclaim or leave the one Fork.
+
+
**Contrary/recovery case.** Keep Fork carried or die after one committed fastener but before bridge pickup. The carried set returns once; installed/dropped/source objects do not teleport; the unfinished stage is lost; the compact pair remains intact while R01's free frontier changes. The player follows current cues to rediscover the known compact apparatus and continue from the committed checkpoint. A duplicate item, restored spent gas, broken compact group, invisible shot, journal-time completion or silently lost object is a correctness failure, not a harsher variant.
+
+
### Explicit exclusions and pending choices
+
+
No survivor, rescue transfer, home project, language chain, story/core answer, final connection, R26/R33 converter, special enemy, R08/E03/P03 content beyond R09's corridor identity, full save-slot policy, full forty-room arrangement space or Campaign36 evidence ledger is included. The five owner choices—40/40 stabilization, Yeva/Aster first, found working parts versus fabrication, continue-before-departure versus permanent ending, and protected alive/unsent retreat—can remain unresolved because none changes this bounded R01–R03 correctness/experience question. The packet adopts no retained-charge-across-death rule.
+
+
Assets, if separately authorized, are limited to categories needed to communicate this scope: modular corridor/room surfaces and doors; astronaut, Presser and Caller representations with required silhouettes/animation tells; equipment/board/bridge props; UI type/icons; warning/impact/Barrier effects; and directional/non-directional audio equivalents. Candidate assets must be free, legally suitable and substitutable without losing mechanical cues. No AI-generated art, purchase or rare custom-authored asset is assumed. If suitable substitutions are unavailable, visual-fidelity questions are cut or the owner receives a concrete asset exception request before work expands.
+
+
## Correctness evidence versus player evidence
+
+
**Technical correctness checks** ask whether the authored rules execute consistently: one ordinary launch per reservation; no causal-wave recursion; pause freezes without completing; exact O/C/A accounting; one-location object conservation; fastener/alarm/board commit boundaries; carried return; installed/source persistence; one shift; fixed R01; preserved R02/R03 compact pose; historical versus current route labels; suspend/resume only if that behavior is authorized in the packet. These checks can reveal a contradiction or defect. They cannot establish discovery, readability, tension, balance, accessibility or fun.
+
+
**Later real-player evidence**, only after separate authorization and recruitment, asks whether unfamiliar consenting players notice the board/Fork relationship, form a packing intention, understand why their chosen rig behaves differently, use automatic fire and manual Barrier deliberately amid the crowd, use the journal pause without losing state understanding, predict return/death property results and explain the local shift. Record assistance, device/options used, actions, explanations and contrary cases. Do not script the inference and then count compliance as discovery. A small sample diagnoses problems; it does not prove population rates or campaign duration.
+
+
## Proposed responsibilities and staged deliverables
+
+
These are responsibilities to staff, not claims that a team, Unity expertise, hardware, assets or players already exist.
| **A. Contract and technical plan** | Implementation lead, Systems, content/level owner, UI/accessibility owner, technical reviewer | Revision-locked state/identity/scene list, target hardware/input assumptions, asset substitutions and correctness cases. **Stop** if the rules or ownership cannot be made finite without reopening a core decision. | **24–40 role-hours; 3–5 working days** |
+
| **B. Minimal runtime/content assembly** | Unity-capable developer(s), level/content implementer, UI/audio implementation | R01–R03 plus R09 corridor identity, E01/P01 subset, two rig configurations, oxygen/journal, commit/property and two local arrangements; instrumentation sufficient for later evidence. **Do not add another room/part/enemy to hide a failure.** | **120–200; 3–5 weeks** |
+
| **C. Correctness and recovery** | Technical QA/reviewer with Systems disposition | Reproducible boundary results and defect ledger for normal and contrary cases across supported target conditions. **Block player evaluation** on duplication/loss, broken pause, invalid shift or unreadable required state. | **40–70; 1–2 weeks, partly overlapping B** |
+
| **D. Player evaluation, separately authorized** | Research facilitator, accessibility input, session support, PM/design disposition | Session protocol fixed before results, consent/recruitment record, observations/limitations and explicit keep/revise/cut decision. | **35–60; 1–2 weeks after participants are available** |
+
| **Asset/cue integration allowance** | Art/audio/UI implementers using approved free sources | Necessary silhouettes, tells and equivalent channels only; source/license record and substitution list. | **70–120; overlaps B/C** |
+
+
Total future packet allowance is **289–490 role-hours**, with a rough **5–8 elapsed working weeks after** a named 3–5-function team, target conditions and asset plan are actually available; recruitment lead time is unknown and not hidden inside that range. Confidence is **low** because no implementation team, hardware, asset suitability, pipeline throughput or revision burden has been established. Combining functions may reduce handoffs but not the unique work; staffing fewer people lengthens elapsed time. This is not a development start forecast and does not alter the PM's M3/M4 documentation dates.
+
+
## Expansion and rejection decisions
+
+
- **Stop and repair** before player sessions if any correctness blocker remains.
+
- **Revise within the same packet** when cues or geometry obscure the intended decision but the contracts remain sound; record the exact change so comparisons remain interpretable.
+
- **Prefer the smaller direct Sensor→Projector rule** if early Fork branching cannot be explained without a solved recipe or consistently creates accidental control loss.
+
- **Cut or isolate the local shift comparison** if a valid two-arrangement subset cannot preserve identities/recovery without importing the full station architecture.
+
- **Expand to another objective, special enemy, rescue, language chain or connection challenge only after** the named packet answers its decision and the owner authorizes the next scope. A positive result supports this content and these participants only.
+
+
Full-v1 readiness still requires Campaign36's accepted crosswalk, scope37 critique/response/disposition and one whole-v1 coherence disposition. M3 is not closed by this article. The PM's F1.14 forecasts remain **M2 11 September (10–14), M3 14 September (11–18), and M4 10 November (20 October–1 December)**. There is no authorized development start date or defensible validated-full-game completion date; the owner's 30/90/100–200-hour ambitions remain unproven.
