You’ve hit the nail on the head Dan. The original OBN ruling was very clear (unlike the GSI era “rulebook” for instance). Allies putting gold into the vaults of one nation via 948 or other means was prohibited. Accumulating gold on your own by taxing high etc. was specifically allowed. All the other verbiage was explanation as to why the decision was made to implement the ruling. Now Clint is suggesting a totally new ruling which would go further. Whatever the rule turns out to be, we will all abide by it (or not and be penalized etc.), but in neither instance can there be any “spirit of the rule” (who brought up that ridiculous phrase in the first place?). The next ruling, as the original, can only ban certain actions (or force certain actions). If you take actions contrary to the rule, you cheat. There are no “loopholes” or “spirit of the rule” to be exploited. Obviously, a lot of players did not take the time to comprehend the original ruling, and instead have acted upon what they wanted it to say…
No, it makes no sense whatsoever. You were crystal clear on what was banned, not allowed, etc., and what was still allowed. I wish you would stop pandering to the whiners who can’t understand straightforward, plainly worded English. (I’ll give Herman a break since he is Aussie. <bg>)
Actually, all the other verbiage is the proof that the details you cite are incongruent with the intent of the rule in the first place. Re-read - it’s straightforward, plainly worded English.
There we are; that’s the Brad we know and love! Just when I thought you had finally understood the ruling, here you go and prove you are as incorrigible as ever. <g> (I really don’t understand why you issued an apology on up in this thread then ??)
Ruling 10th December 2006; “Gold sent to a single nation with the goal of significant upward increase of market prices is not allowed…”
Very clear what is banned, and not allowed. You can repeat your mantra all you want; that doesn’t make it so however.
Okay. I’m the forest guy, you stick with the trees. We’re all agreed and everyone gets to be right.
Drew, this is an English sporting concept and is pretty alien to Americans. Afterall, we have been separated for more than 200 years. When you ask the standard Englishman just what he means by the ‘spirit-of-the-game’ the usual response is “I know it when I see it.” Much like pornography, I guess.
I’m sure we would like to hear Clint’s definition. I have always opposed applying English sporting ethics to this game, which is an amoral one.
Recall, this game was designed as a Tolkien simulation. Tolkien’s universe was an amoral one and with him being a devout Catholic the concept of Moral Freewill permeates the epic.
You guys… incorrigible as ever, eh?
Dw i’n Cymreig, NID Saesneg frvnt … LOL 
As I’ve attempted to describe, the oriignal ruling did fully encompass the intent of the ruling, my apologies for any confusion this has caused. I’m hoping to address that with that other bug-bear of code-change.
I think I addressed the difference between world-views, some of that is pseudo-nationalistic, some just different viewpoints, (I have many American friends, and some have viewpoints that I share more closely than those of my many English friends - I even liked one English person enough to marry her)… 
So we’ll see what happens and we can deal with that feedback then.
Clint (ymdrechu drechu)
LOL – I even Liked one English person enough also that I married her to
Looks like someone else can’t define it either.
Oh Ed, silly. He forgot the word “not”. He’s typing quickly in his third language, you American un"spirit" or un"sporting" hard-butts, so unforgiving (come now, amoral combat zone decision making necessity vs forgiving…yeah yeah, we get it…).
yes that was the stop gap fix to keep turn 1 manipulation of the code problem that creates the OBN effect… So your saying it’s OK to continue to manipulate the broken code… by manipulating it in a different way? There is NO need to win in this manner… No need for huge reserves for to win the game… 100k Dragons would not be bought if you used this becuase it sucks down the effect! So that is not an issue… There are plenty of dragons out there that require no Gold! or maybe a few Good artifacts which are relatively safe by puting the artifacts on them!
Yes I played way back in the day of snail mail… when you had to call people in order to coordinate between a couple of nations and when only 1650 was around… I’m just as confident of my chances of winning when I play FP or DS without manipulating a code error that produces unrealistic market conditions…
But hey I could always just play easterlings and go FP early in game if it remains the same way… Let’s See the DS manipulate the code when All the DS are forced to maintain troops everywhere the entire game! Of course there is a counter to that!
I’ve read this thread with a great deal of interest. I’ve been involved with this game since Game 20 with GSI, so more than 15 years. I play a whole host of other computer-based games too, ranging from MMOs to strategy games like the Civ series to FPS like Call of Duty 2. I’ve also got numerous friends in the game development industry.
All multi-player computer-based games ever made have one thing in common. The published code will have unintended outcomes when players start interacting with it.
Some people here have used words like “cheating” to describe the usage of the OBN and its derivatives. While I don’t believe it’s cheating to use published code, it is commonly referred to as an “exploit” and that looks like what’s happening here. What do game companies do when an exploit is revealed? They fix it in their next patch to make the game fair for everyone.
Clearly that’s what’s required here and I hope Clint and team can get it released soon. The thing that dismays me are the people saying it’s fine as is. It’s not. It goes against the original design concepts of the game and clearly skews the game in favor of the DS that employ it. The people who say it can be countered seem to have blinders on. While technically possible it is not really feasible. The key factor supporting this point is that it takes far more resources to find and counter than it does to employ. Not to mention the fact that by the time the FP figure out what’s going on to begin with, much of the damage is done. The DS will have worked their way through much of the danger zone of the early-mid game. By the time the FP can determine the DS culprit and muster resources against it the DS will have likely established tolerable economies outside of inflated market sales.
So Clint, how soon can we expect a code fix?
Darren
GB 1650 game 90 will be the first game to test the new coding
Can hope it starts soon (need 2 more players…), so we can end this discussion.
Some people really take it personal, with comments ranging from “Cheating” to “Big Brother”.
I haven’t been argueing for or against the OBN , but yes have called it Big Brother when the NATURE of the game is gonna change with a new rule that is now making you issue orders you don’t want – 315, 948 or not issueing orders you do want like 325 if a so called cap is put on gold !! I agree that the Code does need to be changed/fixed but not by making a player have to issue orders or not issue orders as it is there game – the Game was clearly designed to go over the 100k gold mark – or why would they have dragons that can be recruited for 100k – and I have recruited these dragons at least twice in my game play over the years !!
And yes I am putting my money where my mouth is as I am signed up for that gunboat game to help test the new code out – can others say the same !!
Mike currently in games 72,(2) 73, 75, 76,(3) 84, so am active in alot of games , Number in () is how many nations am running in those games !!
I wasn’t blaming anyone, only the whole discussion, which I think is getting (has gotten) out of hand. Futile to discuss any further untill we’ve seen the results of the new coding.
And yes, I’m gonna be in that GB as well. I don’t mind at all testing new coding. Been playing a good deal of Online Rpg’s, which are constant beta-testing…
Dan,
I feel you in this. My past reply was my pulling my hair out in this whole mess. I think we have each had a turn at that in the last two weeks. My tone was harder then it should have been. I did not call you or anyone a cheater, but to say the spirit of the game and the ruling was broken. I accept that you dont think that was going on. Just as I hope you guys accept that ONBing needs to be fix for good. What got me upset really for the first time in this whole mess was that memebers of your team posted what I thought that they did not want to change the loophole of how you are ONBing and that they seemed to be placing the blame of their actions on FP play. In my mind it was a slap in the FP’s face.
Look I’ve played past games where I have ONBed more then once, I know what its about. But since the ruling, I’ve not. Its a sure win and it has been show to be a game glitch not a “know how” way to play like and encouteer list as I looked at it in the past. I understand where you guys sit, and how its would be hard to play one way knowing how somthing work. Despite what some people post you cant win vs. a DS team ONBing (on any level) that knows what its doing these days. Yes I won as FP in GSI game 18 when I had 52,000,000 gold in the bank with cardy, but teams are better now, e-mail and such has changed the game. The last grudge game we just played, I told my team to DROP the Dog lord gold down and move it as we where getting close to the levels (like90k) of being to high and could be seen as ONBing. I thought it broke the rule. No we did not 948 gold we did not even have intent, he just sold, got an encounter that gave him gold, and lost all his armies on turn 1. Did it hurt my team? Yes. So I feel strongly about the issue and did think the rule was about intent. But its clear many did not; many felt as you did intent was not an issue, its about the letter of the law of the ruling. Now its going to be fix.
I stated in an email to your team captain and ME when this started, we felt cheated and thats honestly how we felt, this was not to call you guys cheaters. Clints takening most the fall out/blame of 85, as he should, and has done, in my mind, great job of dealing with this issue. Now, you got Clint saying you where fine and it was his mistake and he has owned up to it and is fixing it. It seems to me the heart of the misunderstanding between our teams was that we FP’s 85 thought as a grudge game we not get this, and you guys thougth you should play the BEST game you could, why not use somthing that works. Final feeling of the FP’s is that if 85 is the cost of code change thats fixes the market right, then it has a lasting inpact on many other ME games to come, we did good.
Good luck with your person things going on. I hope that you remain playing the game and perhaps we can do it again sometime. I did enjoy many parts of 85, and I thank your team for working this out with us. Feel free to get in any last words, I want the matter to be over with and move on. I’ll not post on 85 again.
Cheers,
JL
Fair enough,
we’ll meet again. 
Dan
I guess the game I played as free people against the dark servants that employed the OMN and we still managed to defeat the dark servants doesn’t count.
I love it when people throw their opinion out as fact. I guess I am pretty good at doing this as well.
I have no problem with a code fix, and I hope it manages to make the game better and more enjoyable for everyone. What makes the game great, is the many different styles of play that can be employed. Some are better than others, but that is why we play the game.
tim
Tim,
Grudge or Indie? I don’t think anyone’s arguing 100%, there is no 100%, see Ar-Gular killing Akhorahil in challenge… But while the game split might be “close to” balanced in the “big pile”, Clint has conceded that it’s more DS in Grudge games. And, I would hazard that if you took good veteran teams, you’d find a larger DS skew. And if you gave them all OBN, well, I don’t think anyone that says “It’s possible” can necessarily argue against the odds that curve would skew quite dramatically towards the DS…