I agree with the change but I don’t agree with the refund. Hasn’t the CFJ already resolved this issue?

The CfJ resolved whether it was legal (it was).  This is aimed at the question of whether it was right.

, obviously.

I agree with the change to the rule.

I agree with the change to the rule, but not to the refund.

I have to agree with Bucky. The rule should be changed, but exploiting a bad rule before it CAN be changed is half the fun of the game.

Scamming is fun, but the ability of a quorum of players to chide a single player for going too far against the spirit of the rules is also an important part of keeping the game fun for everyone.

I wouldn’t be contesting a declaration of victory if Chronos had been devious enough to pull off an overnight win, from this. But if your scam has a short-term bonus and you can’t capitalise on it in the time it takes other players to fix the wording and punish you for spirit-breaking, then you aren’t scamming hard enough.

Kevan:  You are probably aware of my views on this issue.  Whoever spots the scam first has the right to have a little fun.  If someone scams it after we make proposal to fix it, then we punish them.

“A little fun” is fine, but if you go too far (particularly if you’re doing something that disadvantages other players; I’d have been less bothered by a scam that just gave the scammer a bit more stuff), I think you can expect a few other players to frown on it. I’ve not been watching the numbers too closely in this Dynasty, but -$520M seems like a lot of non-fun for one player.

Does no one else see that this rule does not need to be changed; that it is, in fact, perfectly possible to safely distribute all of your production points without risk of your subsidaries’ screwing you?  I’ve been hoping that at least a few other Corporations were simply hoping, like I was, to be able to eventually make use of this fact.  Now I won’t be completely opposed to the rule being changed, but I’d prefer if it remained, since it encourages those Corporations with lots of bonus production from subsidiaries to be more cautious.

I am definitely opposed to the refund; Brendan’s bankruptcy is Chronos’s reward for pulling the scam, since they (*shudder*) have a good chance of being able to buy out Brendan.  I see no need to require a scam to be an “overnight success” to have a lasting effect.  A bit unfair to Brendan, but…  Brendan was sort of “in the lead” at the time; could have safely distributed production points; could have realized that there was something outside of their (*ugh*) influence that might decrease production; and can produce cash to get out of bankruptcy, and still have tons more factories than most of us.

Apparently no one else does see it.  Kindly explain for those of us on the slow end of the classroom?

Weakly, . A lot of the points raised here have merit. Hix’s argument that it’s not illegitimate for a subsidiary to have a degree of power over the parent (enough, at least, that the parent should have to watch its back) is not a bad one, and somewhat corroborates my own feeling that, once a Corporation has been bought out, there should be some other incentive for them to continue playing. Also, I’m unconvinced that Chronos’ original scam was too far over the line; transposing his actions to myself, I could see myself being keen to assert their legitimacy. The odds are good that, as things stand, the extent to which he will benefit is limited. He needs four more subsidiaries to win, and will quite probably fall prey to his own scam before that happens.

On the other hand, the rules as they stand are a problem, as an organised group of subsidiaries working in concert can quite easily make life impossible for a parent company. I’m not convinced by the argument that “the scam hurt Brendan too much, so we should reverse it”, but I am much more convinced by the idea that moving the game in this direction - with one uber-company fending off its circling brood - is boring and counterproductive. It seems to me that the best way of dealing with this is to hit the reset switch.