Patrizierforum

@ starstruck
@ bizpro

I need your help. Can you please translate the detailed post of starstruck, particular the last 2 paragraphs ( what's the meaning of BT ) because I am not sure, that I can understand it complete.

Thanks Wasa

edit by bizpro
BT stands for Balitc Trader. A P III genius who, together with some other players of the TSR forum, found out many exploits and tricks. Unfortunately he has not yet submitted hos first save - he's probably pondering some more strategies.
BT ist Baltic Trader. er ist ein P III genie der, zusammen mit anderen mitgliedern des TSR forums viele exploits und tricks herausgefunden hat. leider hat er noch nicht sein 1300 save abgegebe. wahrscheinlich ist er noch dabei seine strategies auszubrueten.

I´m not that good in writing english.

so you have to live with my bad english


But need to say it

Starstruck aint cheating at all.

It´s a trick many players are using. So now you using it to get better number in the contest. that aint cheat - it´s still the same trick.

And it´s a trick in the game. Like many other tricks - many players are using all the time.

also the german players know that. Maybe some of them just a bit sad cause they didn´t think of that first. and other players just don´t use that trick. So many way to play this great game.

and by the way - great gaming you got there.

Quoted

as found out by Ugh! the normal distribution does not exceed 20/30/50.

BTW, Off topic, I'm not convinced by that. The distribution limits seem to me to be happiness dependent, and at high happiness (well above the 6/6/6 mark; if the scale went that high I think I ended 1301 at around 8 or 9 in many towns) the limits seem higher than 20/30, while at around 4-5 happiness I'm seeing limits of ~ 17/24% or less.

E.g. Edinburgh at 5/5/5 between Jan 21 and Jan 25 1302 had rich leaving when they made only 18.1 to 17.5% of the total pop and between Jan 17-21 wealthy left while making 26.1 to 24.5% of the total pop (then started immigrating again). If the limits were a flat 20/30, both rich and wealthy should have immigrated in these conditions.

E.g. During "crash testing" London 6/6/6 on Dec 28 1301, rich immigrated when they already made 21.9% of the population, but started leaving next day when making 22.3% of the total pop, implying a limit of about 22%. Stettin in a similar test had rich immigration at 19.1%, 21.0% and 22.7% and then emigration next day from 24.2%, implying ~23%. All my towns behaved within a couple of % of this, except the NPT Newcastle which (and I do not understand why) had rich leave much earlier at around 17% despite being 6/6/6. Hence my earlier thoughts that mints might matter as Newcastle is without a mint.

Unless I'm misinterpreting some of my data ... which is still quite possible. Or unless there's some hysterisis in immigration/emigration, which would be a wierd programming quirk and could explain the high/low points. What did Ugh base his proof on?

On topic, thanks for the support. Google is an imprecise translation tool and some words or phrases may be coming out harsher in english than in the German. Some of the google translations do not sound flattering.

Just to add my two cents

The problem with Starstruck's trick is that it subverts the chief intention of this year's contest rules, which were drawn up to avoid cheap tricks like the infinite money exploit and had saves evaluated according to the best development of the Hanse. Starstruck's trick has definitely shown that the current system does not deliver that.

Having said that we already had a similar discussion last year with a definite Old World/New World rift. According to many New World players everything that was not forbidden by the rules was allowed and therefore o.k. to use. In contrast to that, many German players had argued that there are things that may be legal, but definitely are not fair play, so they should not be used.
That may well be a cultural difference regarding the attitudes towards a friendly contest. I certainly would have preferred a contest without Starstruck's trick, but now it is here and we have to live with it.

@bizpro
What on earth should this trick do in the hall of fame. It is, after all, only a means to circumvent imperfect contest rules and not something that actually helps your game.

Quoted

Original von cancunia
Maybe some of them just a bit sad cause they didn´t think of that first.

Please, come on! This is just a cheap shot. None of those who criticized Starstruck's trick in the German forum could seriously be thought of that vain that they wouldn't give other players their due. Most of them just don't like the trick, that's all.

Although I have not taken part of the contest 2007 I want to give a comment.

I think Starstruck discovert how to maximize the ritch people in the Hanse. Nobody in the german Forum has published this Solution in preparation of the contest 2007. Like arbitage or turkish Building it's a aspect of the game not so easy to copy.

In 2006 the players could maximize the contest results with sending money to med. This year it's quite more difficult.

I think that for every aim in a constest the players part is to find the best strategy.

If my strategy dont produce good results i have to cange it. If I dont use every advantage I can get this is not honest only silly.

I think there are still a few tricks/strategies that have yet to be discovered and employed in the contest. As we build out the Hanse, I think there are 1 or 2 I havent heard anyone write about yet. We shall see. I'm not far enough along to try them yet, but I will when I get there. (and that will be awhile)

Builder - Set sail into the contest - The waters fine!
I enjoy reading about the diversity of the way people are playing the game. I like seeing how the peaceful traders are progressing. The map is challeging as compared to the standard game. I think it is just a good testament to why this is such a well designed game.

@bizpro

I'm a little bit confused by your statement. My comments were made with regard to a discussion we had during the 2006 contest, while you seem to infer them somehow to the ongoing one. This was definitely not intended. However, if you want a clear statement: The way you and a couple of others made money in 2006 by simply shifting money from different accounts was definitely something I would consider as playing against the spirit, but not the letter of the contest rules. You were perfectly within your rights, but I did not like that play. Others were at the time more outspoken on this matter, IIRC.

Re BT's comments on the 2005 contest: I haven't forgotten them, as I had never been aware of them. Had I, I would simply have said that he was wrong and can't have studied the contest too closely. Piracy was allowed, but I would not regard that as a trick, although I've never used it in a contest (None of the top 6 players used it in 2005). 2 of the 4 top players in the contest (Roland and myself) did not use any kind of arbitrage, Gesil did so in very limited way. Ugh!, who at that time was new at the game, turned off arbitrage as soon as he realized that it would subvert the contest rules. Ugh! and Gesil definitely didn't finish on top because they used tricks, but because they played the best game, period.

In 2006, at least Gehtnix and myself used arbitrage in a very limited way, basically to avoid falling behind the pirates too much in the first year. I don't think anyone in that contest had a substantial part of his final CW made through arbitrage.

Furthermore, where on earth do you see a "pouncing" of Starstruck? I've just gone through the posts again and have come to three statements to the effect that the posters are not happy with the existence of this trick (made by Hopsing, Larsson and my posting above). Larsson had also implied he doesn't find that trick fair play, which is completely in line of his argument how he would like a contest to be played. No one has suggested that Starstruck was not entitled to use his trick, rather than that he has shown that the rules of this contest are not as good as many of us have hoped they would be.

@Swartenhengst

I suggest that I shifted Money to the med in contest 2006. It was my mistake that I hadnt read the rules with enough attention to do this from beginning.

I my oppinion the rules forced me to erarn more money then I needed.
200 mio of cash ist mutch to mutch. There are two ways for me playing with erning sa mutch sa posible and get mor points or erarn as mutch as the expansion needs.

I decided to use the first way.

In 2006 some of the top players decided to build a poor Hanse to maximize inhabitants. Because the points where given on headcount. This was reaced by not build or tracking down the houses.

I wonder that nobody commented this manipulation. Me be because only the top four needed to expand the headcount in this way was the reason.

I think that the ones witch find a way to otimize contest points shold earn the benefits. It's easier to read a published trick than to use it effective.

@Builder

No problems. My comments were not intended to claim that one side of the debate is right and the other wrong. But I do have the impression that there is a difference on what how to deal with the contest rules, so some of the misunderstanding in the debate may well come from things either Germans or Americans take for granted whereas others find that highly problematic.

As I pointed out, I don't have a problem with tricks that serve to enhance your overall game like piracy or early arbitrage to enable you to set up your own distribution system earlier, while I don't like tricks that are used only to enhance contest points. Keeping the Hanse artificially poor (by demolishing houses) would definitely fall under that group. In principle, I would like a contest, in which 'normal play' (keeping the population happy, don't destroy too many buildings etc.) would be endorsed and artificial manipulations would be sanctioned. However, I know that others see things differently and that hopes this year's contest rules would provide such conditions are pretty much an illusion.

@Swartenhengst

In backsight the it's easy to find how to make rules better.

For example

If last Year only the company Value without cash had been counted. Offshore mony had no use.

This year if we had recognized how the demolition influences may be the strukture Points would be wighted by average of population.

Hello Gentlemen,
it seems there has been a lively discussion over the last couple of days about whether or not a particular newly discovered trick (and some more well-known ones) are good convention. So let me add my opinion to this subject as well:

It was clearly stated in the rules that everything that lies within the game, such as program bugs and exploits of features in a way the programmers had not thought of, are perfectly fine to be used throughout the contest. In this light, I cannot understand why the whole discussion has spun off at all. A couple of new tricks were discovered and then the discovery was cordially revealed to everybody else (Thank you, Starstruck ). There is, in my humble opinion, no room for anything but joy.

Regards to everybody,
Balou

An excellent way of summarizing what also comes up to my mind when reading through the discussions of the last days and weeks. It is a great achievement of our community that there is nobody who keeps new discovers secret just in order to improve his or her contest values compared to the others.
We should do any effort that we do not create an atmosphere that could "mentally force" players not to reveal new tricks to the community.

@ Starstruck

I had a look at your total number of rich/wealthy people at 01.08.00:
In your progress report, you count 20707 people, 8,3 % ( 1718 ) rich and 20,6 % ( 4265] ) wealthy. It's unbelievable, how is it possible ?
At this time, in my best attempts I had only 1400 rich and 3400 wealthy. Perhaps my aggressive KI-hunting can be a reason, but is this affect so gigantic at this early moment of the contest ?

Gruss Wasa

Shame on me, that was my mistake the value of wealthy. Thanks for correction.

Err ... don't know. No one told me it wasn't possible, so ...

Those numbers were probably rounded and you mis-multiplied the wealthy. My recorded stats (just double checked from a save) are below. Sorry about the formatting; I don't know a quick/easy way to correct it for posting here:

City Rich Wealthy Poor Rich Wealthy Poor
London - - -168 320 1024 4 5 5
Brugge - - - 165 248 1295 3 2 3
Bremen - - -126 337 1061 2 5 6
Hamburg - -133 390 1193 2 4 4
Edinburgh- -160 286 1198 3 2 3
Bergen- - - -140 422 1326 2 3 5
Oslo - - - - - 148 477 1559 2 4 6
Gotenburg 102 325 1069 1 4 5
Stettin - - - 163 328 1245 3 3 3
Danzig - - - -157 467 1368 3 5 6
Reval - - - - -121 379 1164 2 4 4
Ladoga - - - 126 255 1143 2 4 4
Total - - - - 1709 4234 14645 2.42 3.75 4.50


Everything's well below the 240 rich "limit" and I guess I was just carting goods around with captured ships, etc., to keep people happy. Goteburg's not doing too well of course, but the rest look decent.

I kindof went away from continuing my Patrician game a couple of weeks ago and started a MOO3 largish galaxy instead, which is currently about 200 years in. When I've finished getting my gasbags to conquer the ants, rocks, humans, cyborgs, lizards and fish on my doorstep I'll start back on Patrician again

@ Starstruck, Bizpro

Thanks for the quick answers.

I also started to supply the towns as far as I can with the captured ships of the KI, but my values at 1.8. are clearly lower than yours. Though I had only 18.000 citizen, I had only 7,5 % rich ( 1353 ) and 18,1 % wealthy ( 3233 ).

For me it's impossible to reach rough your absolute values in this early phase of the game. Respect

Gruss Wasa