December in Irata

[Bertoid]

On the last month, in the Atari version at least, no AI ever sold anything.  I always assumed this was because in the final round assets were counted higher than the other months.  Or maybe I read it somewhere, I don't remember.  Can anyone tell me if there's any reason for me, a human, to specifically sell or not sell in the final round as opposed to any others?

[Intergalactic Mole]

At the end of each month, your goods are only worth what the store was buying them for in the auctions that were just held.  Therefore, in the last month, there would be no point in selling, since they are all worth the amount you would be selling them for anyway.  Likewise, buying in the last month would be silly, since you would be lowering your score...

[Big Head Zach]

In the last round, the game does not perform a post-auction valuation based on the average price traded, so there's no incentive to buy or sell; as a matter of fact, if you do sell your Food/Energy to the Store in the final round, your score will actually decrease, as the Store's prices for buying your Food and Energy are actually $15 less than the actual "current price" (Smithore and Crystite are not).

In a sense, the only real reason to have a Round 12 Auction Phase is to show the final price of Crystite, or any of the goods, for that matter. That whole sequence could be replaced by a more visually-stimulating "final push" as all of the players' assets are totaled (land, outfitted MULEs, and each good), something similar to the end of a level of SmashTV (if anyone here gets that reference). You could even use the histogram bars used in the normal auction sequence as a way of "raising" the players to their eventual standings, as if they were medal-awarding platforms at an athletic event.

[Intergalactic Mole]

Disregard my previous message.  It took me reading Big Head Zachs post to remember now how the original game of MULE calculated the value of goods.  

In the original Atari game of MULE, for each commodity, if no goods are sold during the auction for that month, then the goods are worth the exact value of what the store is buying each of the goods for.  

If goods are bought or sold, then the value of that good in the summary is the average price of the transacted goods for that auction.  For example, if 3 units of food are traded for 20, 30 & 40 then the value of each food in the summary will be 20+30+40/3, or 30.  This applies to the last round as well.  In other words, in the last round, if another player collaborates with you, you could potentially drive up the price of any goods you want by purchasing it at a higher price than what the store is buying it for.  For example, if the store has no food, and offers 15 per unit, and nobody buys or sells, each food will be worth 15 in the summary.  However, if 1 player purchased 1 unit of food from another player for 200, then all units of food are worth 200 each for the summary.. even in the last round.  There was a big debate about this on the Atari MULE Online forums a few years ago.  A lot of people considered this to be an exploit but it's how the game was designed because it works the same way during every month.  Perhaps it's an inbalance, but it takes 2 to tango.  You cannot do this exploit without 2 people agreeing to do it (the computer won't help you do this, so it's not possible in a single player game).

Go ahead and test using the original Atari game if you want.  I know I am correct.  I spent a long time figuring it out.  

[Big Head Zach]

Go ahead and test using the original Atari game if you want.  I know I am correct.  I spent a long time figuring it out.

No need; Kroah's notes show that you're correct. It was also regarded as an exploit largely due to the fact that the C64 version, which came out later, removed post-auction valuation in the last round. If the developers thought it was broken enough for a code revision, then that's really all there is to say.

[Intergalactic Mole]

The C64 version of MULE had many differences from the Atari version besides just that.  Besides, there is no official reference to where developers claimed the Atari code was broken.  And so all we can do is speculate.  I wouldn't call it an exploit specifically because it takes 2 human players to accomplish this, and very likely one of those 2 players will end up losing the game.  So why would they want to do it?  Usually its done by trickery to players who are not familiar with how goods are valuated in the first place.  IMO they screwed up the C64 code and forgot to implement proper goods valuation for round 12.  ....  I am curious if the C64 version even uses average traded price for valuation in the months prior to round 12.  Anyone ?

[Big Head Zach]

I am curious if the C64 version even uses average traded price for valuation in the months prior to round 12.  Anyone ?

It does. I remember doing that specifically by trading one unit of Food just to make my stockpile worth a lot more.

And while the developers never went on record publicly stating that the Atari exploit was indeed an exploit, the larger community of MULE players (as seen on www.worldofmule.net) regard it as such.

Because if you can set the price to $200, what's keeping you from setting it to however much money the "buying" player has left? And does he stand to gain anything? All it does is put the selling player way over the top, and artificially inflate the colony score. I'm not so sure you want that in a competitive simulation-game.

[Intergalactic Mole]

It does. I remember doing that specifically by trading one unit of Food just to make my stockpile worth a lot more.

OK. I am not sure why you would want to do this mid game though.  Putting yourself in first place could cause you to lose a plot. )

And while the developers never went on record publicly stating that the Atari exploit was indeed an exploit, the larger community of MULE players (as seen on www.worldofmule.net) regard it as such.

I've been a member of World of Mule practically since it's inception and I have no idea what makes you think the larger community of MULE players would agree with you.  If you cannot provide a factual reference to back up your statement, then it is just opinion .  I have no doubt that there are many players who will agree with you, but I assure you there are many that agree with me as well.   It was a pretty heated debate on the Atari MULE Online forum and the consensus was pretty much split even.

Because if you can set the price to $200, what's keeping you from setting it to however much money the "buying" player has left? And does he stand to gain anything?

Again, it takes 2 human players to tango here.  And only one player can win the game.  And so one of the collaborators has nothing to gain by doing it.  Usually it's plotted in advance against a player who is mindlessly replacing all of their goods with Crystite thinking that the other goods can't possibly be of any value at the end of the game.  When you consider this, it may sound less like an exploit, and more like a way to get revenge against the mindless Crystite drones!

All it does is put the selling player way over the top, and artificially inflate the colony score.

It increases the value of the traded good for all players, not just the seller.  There is nothing stopping the other players from taking this possibility into consideration when planning their end-game developments.  It doesn't always work in favor of the player who's idea it was either.

[Big Head Zach]

And while the developers never went on record publicly stating that the Atari exploit was indeed an exploit, the larger community of MULE players (as seen on www.worldofmule.net) regard it as such.

I've been a member of World of Mule practically since it's inception and I have no idea what makes you think the larger community of MULE players would agree with you.  If you cannot provide a factual reference to back up your statement, then it is just opinion .  I have no doubt that there are many players who will agree with you, but I assure you there are many that agree with me as well.   It was a pretty heated debate on the Atari MULE Online forum and the consensus was pretty much split even.

Ok, you caught me in a rather large assumption, and I admit, I didn't scour WoM to find the consensus. However, in the MULE websites I've browsed as I learned about the game and in the development of a board-game version (currently sitting on my shelf, 80% complete), every mention that I read of that particular difference between the Atari and Commodore versions, described it as an exploit. So if there's a debate about it, then I'll proudly admit that I think it's an abuse of the Store's normal attempt to re-valuate goods during the normal course of the game, but is flat out silly to do for the purposes of inflating final score - there is no demand in the final round, so there's no need to have trading happen in the first place; hence, no opportunity to change price.

[Intergalactic Mole]

Ok, you caught me in a rather large assumption, and I admit, I didn't scour WoM to find the consensus. However, in the MULE websites I've browsed as I learned about the game and in the development of a board-game version (currently sitting on my shelf, 80% complete), every mention that I read of that particular difference between the Atari and Commodore versions, described it as an exploit. So if there's a debate about it, then I'll proudly admit that I think it's an abuse of the Store's normal attempt to re-valuate goods during the normal course of the game, but is flat out silly to do for the purposes of inflating final score - there is no demand in the final round, so there's no need to have trading happen in the first place; hence, no opportunity to change price.

I understand why you think it's an exploit from your previous posts. It is not necessary to repeat yourself or try to further justify why your opinion is better than mine by reaching as far as to even cite your own development of a board game (which should not be sitting on the shelf at 80% complete!!), which has no relevance to the discussion.  It still doesn't change my opinion.  Also, you may notice that fans of the C64 and Atari are pretty die hard to their own versions and will likely defend every aspect of their own version until the last man is standing, and so I'm hardly going to consider a cited article that compares the C64 to Atari version to be an approved joint opinion of the 2 communities.  In the meantime, please finish your board game.  Someone else even mentioned a card game.  I look forward to both !!! 

[DataPacRat]

As my username indicates, I'm something of a packrat for digital data. I still own an actual, honest-to-goodness real physical Commodore 64. A number of years ago, I bought a C64 version of MULE, and have never sold it. Therefore, at least in my local jurisdiction, it's quite legal for me to run a Commodore 64 emulator to run a copy of MULE.

All of this is leading up to this: I just played a quick 2-person game of C64 MULE... and at the round 12 evaluation, was able to sell a single unit of crystite from one player to another at an extremely high price, and doing so cranked up the valuation of all crystite to that value for all players.

I'm not making any value judgements about whether this is an 'exploit' or a legitimate strategy; I'm simply reporting that that's how this version of the game goes about doing things.

[Big Head Zach]

Just so you know where I'm coming from, I cite this page on World of MULE as to the alleged "difference" in the last round valuation:

http://www.worldofmule.net/tiki-index.php?page=Atari+800

[Intergalactic Mole]

Are you referring to the sentence that reads:

"...it is possible to drive the colony score to astronomical heights during the month 12 auction, when two human players collide. That is not possible on the C64. "

[Big Head Zach]

Yes. It was described in detail on another MULE site, and believe me, I've been trying to find it.

[Intergalactic Mole]

Believe me, I believe you.

However, other users have indicated that the C64 version does in fact valuate certain goods in the last round, specifically Crystite.  Perhaps Christian (from World of MULE) didn't try that.   He is here by the way.

http://www.planetmule.com/forum?topic=420.0