First, I must remind everyone that CAR footnotes in the Q&A format are clarifications from HiG. Footnotes not in the Q&A format are observations made by comparison of HiG and RGG rules documents. Matt has always stated that footnotes never represent personal opinions or conclusions.
This is good information to know. It provides a context for the origin of the footnotes.
Footnote 70 appears strange on its own, but I think you need to also consider footnote 71 simultaneously. Players are not being given carte blanche to deploy farmers whenever they want. A barn has to have been placed to trigger farmer deployment. At the end of the game, you can deploy your farmers willy nilly, and it's possible that a farm with a barn might yield more points, even at one per city, if all the non-barn farms have a small number of cities. For example, if there exists a farm with a barn that has nine cities attached, you could deploy to that farm and score 9 points. Other farms may only have two cities each, which would only yield 6 points. Note carefully that you cannot score 1 point per city per farmer, so if you have multiple farmers to deploy you would deploy them to different farms.
Unfortunately, footnote 70 is written incorrectly. I don't believe it is HiG's intent to give carte blanche to barn-scoring from the City but the footnote (by itself) indicates that that is exactly what the player may do. Without this footnote to the footnote an unsuspecting player will be implementing incorrect rules into his game - or hopefully be at least confused and questioning. I don't believe even footnote 71 helps to clarify as that relates to the moment the barn is placed while footnote 70 relates to barns already in play.
Footnote 72 is definitely confusing if you're used to the English RGG rules, which only allow deployment to features already being scored. The German HiG rules refers to deployment to features which are completed, but farms are never considered complete, which may be what prompted Matt to ask the question of how does follower placement during final scoring work. HiG is giving more information than we bargained for in their response, and it actually does make sense. Incomplete features are scored at the end of the game; the placement of the final tile is the trigger. In between these two steps, HiG is allowing us to deploy followers to any incomplete feature (and not to any completed features).
Aside from the question of scoring unoccupied features at game end is the question of how to deploy followers from the city at game end. Does the opportunity pass around the table just once? Or continually until everyone is satisfied? During the game it's just once but the footnote indicates it keeps going at game end. I question if it was HiG's intent to contradict the method of during the game deployment.
