Tournament rules: Allow Stockpile Energy in the queues?

[Tau Ceti]

As we know, SMAC is buggy when it comes to Stockpile Energy. If you build a facility and your construction queue is empty, the game automatically inserts Stockpile Energy and counts it as income in the same turn, thus essentially letting you produce twice and giving you some ill-gotten energy credits. The same thing happens if you manually insert Stockpile Energy into your build queue after a unit, but in this case it is not automatic.

Due to the potentially different effects depending on player preference, most PBEMs have made a rule to cover this specific situation. The current tournament rule, prohibiting the insertion of Stockpile Energy in the build queues, has been a bone of contention for some. When I first heard about the bug, the current rule was my suggested solution, and the only comments I received back then were positive. However, it appears that the Apolyton tournament games are pretty much the only ones that use this rule, so I thought I could put it to a vote. The two options are explained below.

• Keep the current rule
  Prohibit the use of Stockpile Energy in build queues.
  Allows the player to keep the queues empty with no negative effects, thus being the least intrusive option. Is exploitation of a bug, but only through not actively avoiding it. Slightly favours facility builders over unit builders. Players who wish to use queues for their intended purpose can do so, but only if all but the last element in the list are units.
• Allow Stockpile energy in queues
  Some players like to insert Stockpile Energy after a unit to avoid accidentally building more units of the same type. This option allows them to do so. Forces players to use Stockpile Energy or lose out on a great amount of credits over the course of a game. Is active exploitation of a bug. Slightly favours low energy, high production factions like the Hive (and Gaians, Drones to a lesser extent). Players who wish to use queues for their intended purpose can do so, but will lose out on Stockpile Energy every single time, losing a lot of credits.

There is also a third logical option: forcing non-empty queues after facilities. This would make the game behave the way it should, never giving additional energy, not skewing any balance and letting players use production queues properly without penalty. However, it forces players never to leave their queues empty and has therefore been extremely unpopular. Due to potential difficulties in determining a majority, this option is therefore not included in the poll, but strong supporters can post here and try to convert people if they wish.

This poll will run for two weeks. Let the discussion begin!

[knowhow2]

I vote for allow stockpile in queues.

[mark13]

I think in tournament games, it should be disallowed - simply to ensure a level-playing field. The ideal solution would be to disallow empty queues after facilities - but I agree that the PIA factor will be too high.

The main reason for my argument is that it gives a *massive* boost to the low income, high energy factions (such as the Hive). I'm in a game right now where insertion is allowed - and because of my focus on high minerals (which I believe to be necessary for the Hive) my income per turn has effectively tripled. This is completely unacceptable in my book, and makes such factions too powerful.

[H0bbes]

I vote to allow the queue.

[H0bbes]

I vote to allow the queue.

[H0bbes]

I vote to allow the queue.

[Flubber]

I'm on the fence but

I can't help but agree with Tau that this is an obvious bug and we should not intentionally exploit it. Also as a matter of balance it would seem to give a greater cash advantage to a high support faction like the Hive. Crawling minerals becomes even a greater advantage-- If you can build a unit a turn, you would get a unit and the cash EVERY TURN. High efficiency factions might be advantaged as well as they are better able to emphasize science when their cash problems are solved by this.

The only good thing about it is that more cash speeds gameplay as players can rush more stuff. But if that is seen as desirable, it is simpler to just start with more cash.

[WhiteElephants]

I was going to say allow it, but Mark13 makes a good point particularly concerning Yang, Miriam, and Domia. I would think these factions would be the ones pumping out units and raking in the credits at the same time.

[Rastapopoulos]

My opinion: disallow it, for the reasons stated above by others.
Question, though: who is actually enforcing it, or put it another way: what keeps a player from actually doing it (in the beginning of the game, while he is sure he hasn't been infiltrated)
I guess there is no way to control it, so why not say: allow stockpile energy in queues until a governor has been elected, effectively up to the point where it can be controlled...? And that's in early midgame, so there won't be any serious unbalancing until then.
It might even be fun to allow the governor to allow or disallow the use of stockpile energy in queues as he chooses, thus giving him another power on top of the ones he already has.
Just an idea.....

[big_canuk]

It is obviously a bug, and in SP one can do with it what one wants. In SP, bases "pop up" when the build queue is empty. In MP, they don't. In MP, I find it easier to make sure stockpile is in the queue of every base at turn end, rather than having to scrutinize every base for units with 10 or less mins, that I might want to change to something else.

There is a side-effect of allowing it in MP. Everyone gets more energy (in proportion to their mineral output). This makes the game go faster. Anything that makes MP games go faster is welcome.

I vote for lifting the restriction. (allowing stockpile in the queue)

[big_canuk]

dp, oops

[Googlie]

There is a feature you can turn on in "preferences" called "Stop when units completed" This pops up the base screen when a unit is completed, with stockpile inserted by the computer.

In scenario tests, I found that this has the same effect as manually inserting 'stockpile energy' in the build queue - you get the unit completed and you get the full energy accrual for that base that turn.

So I'm not sure it's necessarily a bug (or if it is, it's just a 'sequence' bug in that the order for events being transacted generates the 'bug' - but it does for facilities too.

So to create a level playing field, I vote to let players insert stockpile energy in the queue if they wish (or use the "stop when ..." feature, which can't be picked up by the governor or the empath guild)

[knowhow2]

Rasta.... makes a point with the "not able to control if everybody actually are following the rules" thing. As long as no one have infiltrated you or been elected governer the rule could be disregarded. ....
so it would be more fair too all players but it's like instead of cathing the cheaters lets all become cheaters to level things (a similar debate have been going on about illegal drugs for sports)

[Googlie]

b_c is making a good point (to me via ICQ) that he doesn't think the 'stop" feature is active in Multiplayer games. I'm pretty certain I have set up some scenarioed games with the "stop for units built", "stop for Golden Age warning", etc - but of course I don't play in any of me scenarioed games.

Any players out there experiencing that (the Forum Wars ones wouldn't have those 'stops')?

G.

[Tau Ceti]

Considering that none of the other "stop for"-options work, I would be very surprised if this one did. In any case, I fail to see how that would change the bug status - you would still get your production counted twice. (And yes, it is a sequencing bug. The game does all production first, then goes back to check economy; at that point, a number of your bases are stockpiling and get counted. Under standard settings in SP, you get no benefit, because the "stop for" settings are active and let you change production before energy is counted.)

Now for some arguments:

"It is more convenient to have Stockpile Energy as a marker" - only because you have developed your playstyle that way. I, for one, have not, and find this a fairly weak argument. There are so many other ways to keep track of production - for example, the message box with all the turn's events and the fact that a newly built unit plays a sound effect the first time it is activated (at which point you can simply hit enter to get into the city screen and change the production of you like).

"It cannot be controlled" - if you look at the other rules, you will find that most of them cannot be controlled - at least not unless they are done on a grand scale and very blatantly. How should I be able to tell if someone has done an SE flip-flop to gain extra minerals when cashing a crawler? How can I check that none of the others ever use the right-click menu to execute an illegal airdrop? Breaches of the Stockpile Energy rule would actually be some of the most obvious breaches you could get. Yes, it is invisible in the early game, but that is when the benefits of using it are smallest - with just a few, low-production bases. No big deal if someone is so desperate to cheat.

"It makes the games go faster, which is good" - I tend to disagree. Not everything that makes a game go faster is good. (I actually think the game benefits from Tech Stagnation, but that is somewhat beside the point.) The games last so long anyway that an extra turn or five are no big deal. The most critical time where acceleration is beneficial is at the start, and that acceleration can be more fairly achieved through CMN action. If the price of acceleration is skewing faction balance (see mark13's example) then acceleration is bad.

It probably does not come as a surprise that I support the current rule.