2026-09-08 10:37:50
Anonymous:
Record owner firing choice and integrate active revision
hold the flood/design plan.md ..
@@ 12,7 12,7 @@
| Systems | [Combat Rules](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Combat%20Rules) | Controls and aiming assumptions, perception/pursuit, reinforcement cues, interruption/progress, journal pause and build events sufficient for both examples. |
| Reviewer | Focused review in project chat | Read each verified submission on arrival and their combined interface, without another PM permission step. Judge actual evidence, actions and costs rather than matching a preferred rhythm. |
-
Both combat articles and the focused review161 are complete, with actual sources verified. A single coordinated response162 is active: clarify alert/clearance scope, record exposure, completed-work persistence, condition/recovery and evidence/cost claims. The reviewer independently prepares a discovery-chain comparison under163 while authors revise; authors prepare their own after response submission. Those new positions remain private until all are saved and jointly released. Systems supplied the shared contract157 before Lead’s draft. No combat proposal is accepted yet. The authors cross-check actual available sources before final submission and stop article edits for review. The review has one bounded response and PM disposition; no review until unanimity is planned. The original assignment155 and unchanged positions152–154 remain in project chat;162 assigns the coordinated response and163 the reviewer’s independent next comparison. The owner has been asked about ordinary firing controls; no answer has been inferred, and the current control proposal remains provisional.
+
Both combat articles and the focused review161 are complete, with actual sources verified. A single coordinated response162 is active: clarify alert/clearance scope, record exposure, completed-work persistence, condition/recovery and evidence/cost claims. The reviewer independently prepares a discovery-chain comparison under163 while authors revise; authors prepare their own after response submission. Those new positions remain private until all are saved and jointly released. Systems supplied the shared contract157 before Lead’s draft. No combat proposal is accepted yet. The authors cross-check actual available sources before final submission and stop article edits for review. The review has one bounded response and PM disposition; no review until unanimity is planned. The original assignment155 and unchanged positions152–154 remain in project chat;162 assigns the coordinated response and163 the reviewer’s independent next comparison. The owner selected mostly automatic firing with manually activated special abilities. The requirement is recorded in the updated brief and relay165; authors integrate it in response162. Targeting, bindings and particular equipment exceptions remain design proposals.
No numerical balancing, implementation, simulation, playtest, art, complete enemy roster or central mystery answer is assigned. A strong build can win decisively and avoidance can be legitimate. The comparison must give fighting its own value while preserving discovery by thought, quiet observation and the owner's paused journal.
