Referee:
There have been at times innumerable fixes to errors and rebalancings occuring, to both upkeeps as well as Oil, and you have missed a number of key factors in your analysis. One of the few that I can discuss publicly: The nation of Australia is comprised of 2, not 1, Settlements.
The numbers are as they are currently stated in the sheets, and these numbers will in the future continue to change as per the rules or when the GM finds something that needs to be done.
Then what do we have rules for, if they don't apply?
from the rules 20181010_Oficial, applied last turn (bold added in all quotes here):
quote:
4.5.4. Altering Special Resource Unit Demand or Production
After every turn, the Base SRU production of a Settlement will be 5% less (round fractions down). There are 8 different player options for changing SRU demand or production of a Settlement:
#1 - Infrastructure: Represents exploration of new fields and investing in known fields to increase production e.g. extra mining, refining and transportation networks. For a Core Settlement, 1 PApoint will increase the Base SRU production starting next Turn by (GM roll 1D10 + Number of Hexes of the Settlement + World Size -1 for every 5 Turns after the World is surveyed) X (5 for Oil, 0.25 for Pai-Leng, or 0.05 for Tantalum), roundup to nearest integer. For a Colony Settlement, see Mining and Asteroid Mining facilities in section 7.8.
IMO they are crystal clear.
From Q&A point 7:
quote:
Q7: What do my advisors (read: the GM) think is the best course of action?
A7: It is not much of a game if the best way to play is to have the GM play for you. There are no secret game mechanics, or secret reservoirs of knowledge, which would help you if only you asked. Everything that happens in this game is a consequence of what is either in the rules, in the spreadsheets, on the website, or in the forums. It is your responsibility as a player to be familiar with all the sources of information and figure out by yourself what is the best course of action; you are your own ‘experts’
So, if no secret mechanics, the rules should apply as they were (and BTW, the fact you say in your answer “One of the few that I can discuss publicly” also hints that there are secret reservoirs of knowledge, something I always said it’s logical in any such a game, but then don’t claim there are not).
And in your message (in the HP) with date Feb 3rd, you clearly stated:
quote:
New rules: The latest rules proposal has been posted [for the new players: this Rules Proposal has no effect on the current turn, will most certainly be repeatedly revised. The GM will tell you when it comes into effect, likely the beginning of the next Turn.]
So, again, rules should apply as they were.
And yes, I know also about 1.3:
quote:
1.3. Role of the Director
The GM is omnipotent and has the right to do anything he sees fit to keep the game fun, playable and realistic. If a player wants to do something unusual and can convince the GM to allow it, then it happens. If the player is just doing something to take advantage of a loophole or uncertainty in the rules then expect the GM to at the very least forbid it. 'Because the rules say such-and-such' is just the beginning of an argument, the word of the GM is always the ending.
But this time this "doing anything hes sees fit" clarly does not keep the game playable, when tules are broken to a point players can no longer be sure their actions will have the results rules say (and, at least to me, this adds confusión, not fun, to the game).
Neither can you claim this being a unexpected rules loophole, uncertainty or exploit (you know I report them when I find them, and never use them without a confirmation they are not), as I warned you the effects they would have (post 413 this same thread):
Germany:
About the options given in 4.5.4:
- 1 infrastructure: do I read it well? Let’s see...
- US uses a PA to obtain oil. It will obtain (1d10+10 (number of hexes, discounting Alaska and Hawaii) + 8 (world size)) x 5 increased production, so next turn it will produce 95-140 SRUs more
- Germany uses 1 PA on it, and (having 2 hexes) next turn would produce 55-100 SRUs more. If it spends 6 Pas it will produce (on average rolls) 465 SRUs more, so becoming a net exporter....
- China, having 10 hexes will gain as US. As its deficit will be next turn (same assumptions than with Germany above) 153 SRUs, so with a PA or two it could overcome it..
So, if I understand this option right, oil will not only become scarcer as time goes, but probably be quite plentiful.
I had no answer, and you kept the rules as they were, what could we (players, or at least myself) understand but that you were ok with it? Can you blame the players when we (again, at least myself) acted according them?
So, again, can we trust the rules? Are they for us to know how the game is played?
Because when rules clearly state what will be the result (within a margin), and the result is not this one, I get confused. How can I make any meaningful decision this way? And this is not (as too often before) planning for another turn and finding that rules changes make may plans meaningless, but changing the rules mid-turn, when the decision is already made.
This message was last edited by the player at 18:12, Sat 20 Apr 2019.