OCC Rules Amendment

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Straybow

I don't see this as a "bug" or something the designers didn't foresee. It is clearly a feature designed into the game, it only applies when you have a single city at size 1, and have the resources to build/rush before size 2. It must be fairly common in MP with double production.

If it really is "a feature designed into the game" why does it only apply when you have a single city at size 1?

Anyway, I guess the issue is not whether it is a bug or a feature - simply whether we allow it at OCC or not. If it has been excluded in previous OCCs, I vote we maintain the status quo and continue to disallow it.

RJM at Sleeper's

[Smash]

wow....you folks must be bored bumping this old thread back up

Never ceases to amaze me how this game can still attract new players.ANY game makers should force their employees to play this game for 1 solid month.If there was anything left of the people after that,they would know what makes a great gaming experience.

[Grigor]

I have been a devoted user of the size 1 settler trick since I discovered that it is only possible above chieftan mode. Since the designers not only knew how to stop it but actually did so on a lower level, it seems that it must be an intended feature.

This thread seems to have been started rather a long time ago, before polling threads became common. There was an extended discussion of this in CFC last year, and it was decided that it was an acceptable tactic there. As I recall, Xin Yu had a memorable pos on its efficacy.

I will forego further use of it here if the majority so concludes.

[Cyrion]

Do you mean it doesn't work on Chieftain level???

Weird...

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Grigor
I will forego further use of it here if the majority so concludes.

The emerging consensus on the OCC#2 thread is that whoever posts the comparison game can decide whether to allow it or not.

RJM at Sleeper's

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by Grigor
...the size 1 settler trick... is only possible above chieftan mode. Since the designers not only knew how to stop it but actually did so on a lower level, it seems that it must be an intended feature.

This seems quite definitive re intent of the programmer/designers.

Other than "OCC never allowed it before," can anyone offer a logical reason why this feature shouldn't be employed?

[Scouse Gits]

Nope - my original opinion was a qualified acceptance -- now - given that it is clearly an intentional move on the part of the original programming/design team - i vote to allow it unconditionally...

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Grigor
Since the designers not only knew how to stop it but actually did so on a lower level, it seems that it must be an intended feature.

But, the same argument can be used about rehoming caravans:

"Since the designers knew how to stop rehoming caravans but actually did so on some menus, it seems that it must be an intended feature."

However, the point is not what the designers intended, but what we decide to use as our standard. This seems to be a presumption of allowing the size 1 settler exploit unless specifically banned by the person who starts the game.

RJM at Sleeper's

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by Straybow

I don't remember this at all. Musta been when I was hybernating.

Ditto!

Two and a half years ago already?! Time flies... Airbases is still a no, and I can't believe I had doubts about the settler trick...

Carolus

[Zenon]

It is interesting to see these discussions come up from time to time. It seems there are usually the same considerations: intended feature or not, exploit or not. IMHO, these considerations are at best helpful, but never decisive. All we need is a convention how to play together. This is even more true for an OCC, that only exists, because the community has developed rules.

Now, if the game starter has not allready set rules of his own, the only question that is important:

do we feel the need to ban a certain way to play because it spoils the game?

For settlers at size one: no ban needed

Zenon

[solo]

Recent discussion in favor of permitting size one settlers has been quite convincing. I am again in favor of using this trick and sense a general consensus among active players to allow it future games.

[Elephant]

It might be interesting to run a competition between several players attempting to use it and several not using it...

[Scouse Gits]

Elephant - to me the beauty of the settler trick is that it is not - automatically - a Good Thing -- but rather a strategy that might at times proves useful - hence although your idea is sound - it would require a start in which at least some of the players felt that it might work to their benefit -- in my experience I have most often used this trick when I have tipped an early fortune out of a hut and can afford to rush the settler.

Stu

[Sore Loser]

If you start out working on Iron, Peat or simply a forest then you're effectively giving that square a food boost, making it worthwhile regardless of hut tipping results. I think.

[Carolus Rex]

Hm...

A forest is one food and two shields... A settler is 40 shields... Not counting the city square itself it would take 20 turns to complete the settler, which just fills the food box as well... What does the city square produce if you're on grassland?

Anyway, the trade-off is clear... Suppose you have a whale and peat/iron in the city radius... Without any hut money, working the whale won't make the settler come alive before size two... But sacrificing that whale early on... It would hurt...

Throw in hut money and a hut archer to disband and the settler trick looks more attractive...

Carolus