"1st Annual Sitka Cull 2018" by BCKidd

[BCKidd]

I wonder if we'll see any guest players? I think that'd be kinda cool, actually. Peace.

BCKidd.

[stancomputerhunter]

I'm planning on using the Sitkaboom rifle.

[DYEUZ]

I wonder if we'll see any guest players? I think that'd be kinda cool, actually. Peace.

BCKidd.

Well, if this comp would have been made in Jan 2019 , i would be one of them !

[BCKidd]

Registration is now open. Hope to see you all out there. Peace.

BCKidd.

[SoftShoe]

Registration is now open. Hope to see you all out there. Peace.

BCKidd.

I'm in & for my fellow competitors a special tip. Eat the yellow snow, its lemon flavored!

[DYEUZ]

Registered ! Thx again for hosting !

[Faultier]

I wonder why you had to add that rule now I don't really see anyone getting more than 1 kill with the available weapons

I may be the one responsible for that . Without reading in full , the required weapons , i said to BCKidd, that a kill with some buckshots , killing two Sitka , could be possible .So my bad for not reading in full before talking about this . I had a sad issue in the last comp , about shooting two Ptarmigan with one shot and other great scoring animals , which at time of entering the link , told me it didn't fulfill the one shot one kill requirement .So ,maybe ,there is still flashback of that in my head .

So you are the one to blame for that , good to know.
But i think i did my part aswell.If not with the story at the end of the last comp,
then perhaps because i took advantage of the old rule a few times during the 2 of each.
I never saw it as a bad move, actually rather the opposite.
like putting in some extra effort to make the hunt count or as some kind of 2nd chance.
And with all the nice features the game offers to invalidate a hunt (invis rocks , uncollectable animals, wrong /not registered hits, and so on),
i felt i was just fair to have a small safety net , therefore im a bit sad to see the old rule go.
In the end it wont have a big impact on the comps , so not that big of a deal, just my opinion.

[Tod1d]

There was always a flaw in the "Shots = Harvests" rule in that you could make up for a miss or lost animal by getting a double kill. I just fixed it. It was never intended to be allowed, it just wasn't checked.

[DYEUZ]

...A miss , a wounded animal that we can't find , an animal needing two shots , i agree that this deserves the 1 shot / 1 kill rule .Because it's a miss and considered a negative report in the stats .

On the other hand , killing more than one animal with one shot , is a success, a rare situation , a plus , showing skills and / or luck and should not be considered negative , au contraire , it's very positive for the hunter . So , in the end , he should not be penalized for that .

This is of course only my opinion ,but would be cool if we could make the UHC system recognise that ,but first ,convince Brian that it should be allowed eventually .

[Faultier]

I wouldn`t call it a flaw more of a fun thing to do when things require extraordinary measures
On the other hand , newer players might not know about this possibility.
so having the rules set straight, might add to the fairness of the contest and avoids confusion.
It still was a damn good feeling having a hunt saved that way.