 |
| |
|
|
snoopy369
|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bongo
The breaking point for this exploit is 10 workers. Below that and the workers cost more shields than your starving specialists will give back to you. Not to mention the pop-points.
I don't mind banning this exploit for the ironciver games. Even though it's use is limited.
How do we word it then? 'Thou shalt not add workers to starving cities when rioting'? |
Actually, unless i'm mistaken it's a bit lower than that. Remember, you might be willing to 'sacrifice' shields (ie, lose overall shields) from other cities to increase them at one city- it's a way of getting aroung the "no rushing wonders" rule. Sort of like building a caravan in civ2 - 50 shields in Chicago in exchange for 30 shields in New York on the Hoover Dam, or whatever.
I suggest banning it. It's clearly an exploit to get around certain rules, mostly the "no rushing wonders" rule, regardless of how realistic it is. Otherwise they'd let you poprush a wonder, which is exactly the effect of what you're doing.
Word it as "You may not cause a city to enter disorder with the purpose of adding workers to it beyond its normal limit, nor may you add a worker to a city to cause it to go beyond its normal limit (beyond its food capacity)." I know it's saying it twice, but it's probably a good idea to make both parts crystal clear. It might even be a good idea to put explicitly "You may not do anything that causes a wonder to be built faster than a city can build it through the production of its population, excepting the production of a scientific or military GL. Any other boost of a city's production is considered an exploit", although some people might think that harsh and might interpret it too strictly...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
snoopy369
|
|
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004
time: 23:35
|
|
True, and that was one of my main concerns. However, it leaves something to be said that there might well be other similar maneuvers, or even very different maneuvers that are designed around one specific goal: rushing a wonder beyond its normal finishing-time, in ways that are not intended in game. Hence my desire for a somewhat less specific 'ban' and for a more general ban, but still one that is adequately specific not to ban legal and valid moves...
Perhaps simply "The Worthington maneuver (speficically taking advantage of city disorder to add population to a city beyond what it normally would be allowed) and any other maneuver specifically designed to work around the prohobition on wonder-rushing shall be banned. Tactics that may skirt close to this rule should be discussed either with the players or a neutral third party beforehand. This is not designed to prevent a player from doing damage to his own city to build a wonder, as that is a legal strategy, nor from adding population to a city in the normal method (worker adding, up to the city's ability to support itself with food), but to prevent using exploits and exploit-like tactics to rush a wonder faster than a city should be able to produce it."
It's very wordy and not simple, but Iron Civer rules are meant to be specific and enforceable. It's better than most US laws by a longshot, and probably less loopholey too 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-10-2004 11:53
Friends, PBEMers, fellow Apolytonites-
|