Turnplayer Thread #3

[Krill]

If you guys can show me that it was because of a solid bug, and not the players mistake, then you have grounds for a reload.

[regoarrarr]

But can't we ask the other teams? If all (or a majority?) of the teams agree to a reload, wouldn't that be acceptable?

[Krill]

No, that'd be cool if everyone agrees, but if a team disagreed with it then I can't force them to accept a reload without a good reason

[ruff_hi]

Wait, something weird is going on. Somehow PAL has BOTH of our wines, and we have both of their gems. Uh... huh? mostly_harmless, did you also suggest a wines for gems trade with PAL? I appreciate the initiative, but if you're going to do that, please post something!

I thought PAL could just trade one of 'their' wines for one of 'our' gems? Doesn't that work? Or is that option not available?

[Zeviz]

...
I am strongly in favor the war solution. Anything to sort this out quickly - and both of our teams NEED that happiness.

A single unhappy citizen who would have worked unimproved plains forest would cost us 2 food and 1 production until we complete another unit for MP. So we don't "NEED" that happiness until we have enough improved around our cities to be able to use it.

Loss of a single cpt of trade income from loss of peace bonus in just two cities would cost us 100$ over the next 50 turns.

Pillaging wines and asking workers to reconnect carries opportunity cost of several worker turns.

So my ranked list of options is:
1. Ask PAL to pillage their Gems. (PAL pays cost for mistake.)
2. Do nothing. (We don't have enough tiles improved to need more happiness at the moment. And since PAL is our biggest long-term threat, I don't want to go out of our way to help them.)
3. Pillage our wines. (We pay the cost, PAL gets bigger benefit.)
4. Do the war trick. (We pay slightly higher cost than PAL, who has several intercontinental trading partners.)

[Swiss Pauli]

Had a look in game, and we can't trade a resource back to PAL (nor them to us). They had a similar problem with Banana with a duplicate clams-ivory deal. Depending on mh's feedback, we could trade them clams (we have 3) for fish (they have four) to see whether there's some sort of bug.

If it's not a bug, then we should firstly try 'cancel all deals' to see whether this has precedence of the 10 turn minimum (I don't think it does, but I'm not 100%) then we try the phony war solution.

[mostly-harmless]

mostly_harmless, did you also suggest a wines for gems trade with PAL?

No I didn't. I would have posted something. Go for a reload, everything else is messy. When I left the game, the 2nd wine was not even connected. (workers had not done their moves.) I did demand Machinery from Banana, though, which they did not accept when they logged in. Or was the demand cancelled? Do we have a spy in our ranks? C&D shifts into paranoid mode.

Sullla, when you were doing the turn, Banana was logged in. Did you chat with them about Machinery?

I moved our new horse archer one tile south of Cape Town, so that Imperio can't see it.

Imperio has a spy sitting on our horses presumably, so they will see our "hidden" units.

mh

[sooooo]

Did we actually offer the deal twice? Sullla did it, did someone who logged in before also do it? If not it's a bug.

[sooooo]

When I was chatting in-game with pal they didn't understand it because cres only accepted one deal. I think he's the only one who logs in. And if mh didn't offer the deal then it must be a bug.

[mostly-harmless]

civstatt is pretty clear on the event chain:

- mh logs in
- T117 begins
- mh logs out
- Sullla logs in
- Sullla logs out
- gitbliss (PAL) logs in
- gitbliss (PAL) logs out
- Sullla logs in
- Sullla sees two wine deals

I did not offer any deals to PAL.
Sullla finished the worker actions, connected the 2nd wine and offered one wine deal to PAL.
PAL accepted one wine deal.

Something weird happened.

Reload, reload, reload.

Why would any team disagree to that.

mh

[Sullla]

Alright, if we made only one wines offer, something strange happened. I would also like to make a formal petition for a reload, before we get any further along into the turn. Krill, do we have your permission to post this in the General Forum and PM Snoopy?

I don't understand how this happened...

[sooooo]

If we do reload we should cancel the wining (whining?) worker at the start of the turn. Offer the deal, then finish the winery.

EDIT: Ok, it appears it is a worker roading to connect a winery, not building the winery. The same idea applies though.

[Krill]

Yeah, that looks like a bug. Thanks for clearing this stuff up quickly for me. If, when the reload is up, you could do Sooooos trick with the worker to make sure it doesn;t happen again that would be cool as well.

[mostly-harmless]

So I am going to announce this in the general forum and PM snoopy then?

EDIT: Nevermind, Krill sorted it out already.
mh

[Sullla]

Yes, I will make sure on the reload not to connect the second wines until the gems trade goes through.

Thanks for your help again, Krill. I hope that by catching this bug within the first couple hours of the turn, we can manage to avoid too much confusion.