Reworked to the requested catalogue: small runabout, tractor, large
estate, lorry, sports coupe, armoured carrier. The runabout is free and
everything else is unlocked.
The important change is not the list, it is the axis. Attention is no
longer tied to capability - it is tied to whether the vehicle *belongs
here*. A lorry is three tonnes, well protected and nobody looks twice,
because lorries exist. A sports coupe is quick and flimsy and everybody
looks, because who drives that, here, now. So the whole civilian half
stays quiet however capable it gets, and you pay for speed and armour
in money and in handling instead. Only two vehicles cost you attention,
and they are the two that do not belong: the flashy one and the one
with a gun mount.
That kills the old "each rung must be more conspicuous than the last"
test, which no longer describes the design. In its place is the
invariant that actually matters and is much stronger: across all
thirty pairs, no vehicle may be at least as good as another on speed,
protection, discretion *and* handling at once. That is what stops a
dominant pick appearing and the loop losing its only decision - a lorry
is safe and unremarkable and pays for it by steering like a barge.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
deriveHandling now takes the spec as well as the condition, and every
figure is the catalogue's own number scaled by wear - so the table
means what it says rather than describing a single car with a skin on
it. A tractor turns tighter and grips less than an armoured car, and
stays that way as both of them fall apart.
Fragility reaches both damage paths, walls and bullets alike, since
being shot at is precisely the situation armour is bought for. The same
head-on leaves the tractor at 15% chassis and the armoured car at 77%.
Wear scales the car's figures rather than replacing them, and bottoms
out at a third rather than at nothing. A car that stops entirely at 0%
is a fail state wearing a dial, and the whole point of the garage is
that a bad car is a situation rather than an ending.
Mass moves with the spec; the collider deliberately does not. Different
colliders would mean rebuilding the vehicle controller mid-campaign,
and every barricade gap and building alley in the world is sized
against one car. The mesh changes shape and paint, so a tractor reads
as a tractor from the mirror without the world needing re-measuring.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The loop's problem was that it had no decision in it. Condition was
health, capability, currency sink and fail state all at once, so every
event pushed the same way and there was nothing to weigh against
anything else.
This is the axis the loop turns on instead:
A tractor is slow and made of tin, and nobody looks twice at it.
An armoured car survives being shot at, and everybody notices it.
Five cars from a field tractor to an armoured car. Money buys them
permanently rather than paying a repair bill, so progress climbs while
any single drive still declines. There is deliberately no best one - a
quiet errand down cold roads wants the thing nobody reports, a run into
a district that already knows your face wants the thing that survives
what happens next.
Kept honest by a pairwise test rather than a glance at the table: every
rung has to be more conspicuous than the one below by at least the
geometric mean of what it gains in toughness and speed. The armoured
car failed it on the first pass - 3.7x tougher for 1.4x the attention,
which is a strictly better car and would have collapsed the choice back
into "drive the newest thing". Repriced to 3.6, because being
undercover in an armoured car ought to be close to a contradiction in
terms.
Catalogue and state only; nothing reads it yet.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
