Saturday, January 14, 2023

Proposal: Crop Rotation

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Jan 2023 14:34:32 UTC

in “The Gift of the Isle”, replace “Optionally, they may also do one of the following” with:-

Do one or other of the following

Move the “Apply the Harvest Bonus” bullet point to be immediately after the “For each Domain” bullet point.

End all unfinished “Harvesting the Crop” actions. For each Harvesting the Crop action which both altered Domains and had a Production of Resources action occur during it, undo the steps of it which were performed after that Production of Resources, and undo any subsequent Harvesting the Crop action performed by that same player, considering them never to have performed that subsequent action.

Ending an atomic action on a potentially silent “optionally” means that we don’t really know if somebody has finished their action or not. Domain changing has to follow gathering Resources, so forcing people to always change at least one Domain might be the simplest solution.

Cleanup clause is for anyone who tries to ride this one out.

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

14-01-2023 20:10:28 UTC

I see the problem with determining when the atomic action ends, but I’m not sure I like being forced to swap Domain values or increase or decrease them every time I Harvest the Crop.

I’m thinking about an alternative that isn’t quite so pushy…

Kevan: he/him

14-01-2023 20:16:32 UTC

I suppose another route might be to say that you only get to make one wiki update for the whole thing.

JonathanDark: he/him

15-01-2023 00:12:38 UTC

You could also have a “Harvested” gamestate variable that gets cleared at every Production of Resources, and Settlers have to add their name to the list in Harvested at the end of their atomic action Harvest the Crops.

JonathanDark: he/him

15-01-2023 06:20:03 UTC

imperial

SingularByte: he/him

15-01-2023 07:17:47 UTC

against  I’d prefer a different end step than being compelled to change domain values, on the basis that alliances will become a tad fragile if you’re compelled to change that. Not all alliances would be affected since some are Faction based, but enough that it could be problematic. (Assuming anyone plans to ally, that is.)

SingularByte: he/him

15-01-2023 07:18:55 UTC

Plus wouldn’t it be against fair play to leave an open action just hanging there for more than a few minutes intentionally?
“A Settler should not deliberately and unreasonably prolong the performance of a game action once they have started it.”

Kevan: he/him

15-01-2023 08:56:51 UTC

True enough on fair play.

Compelling players to take occasionally difficult decisions sounds like something that would add to the game, rather than detract.

If we think it’d be useful in itself to track who’s Harvested then that would be another way to do it, but I’m wary of BlogNomic’s tendency to have tunnel vision on patches, where it prefers those that respectfully leave (days old) game rules intact, even if the cost is to add more paperwork elsewhere.

Habanero:

15-01-2023 19:43:30 UTC

against

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

15-01-2023 21:40:40 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

15-01-2023 22:28:27 UTC

against

quirck: he/him

16-01-2023 09:11:44 UTC

imperial

Kevan: he/him

16-01-2023 14:33:54 UTC

against Withdrawing to keep the queue moving.