 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Maniac
|
 |
Gent, Belgium
Jul 1999
time: 06:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie
Although a "fairer" way would have been for Tass or I to play the turn following the PEACE turn orders (which did involve scrapping the Command Center first to raise rush-build cash) |
That would create a nasty precedent though.
Without the rule that the first-played turn of the turnplayer is the official one, one could get situations where factions are demanding a replay of their turn for every little and unintentional mistake and diversion from the orders the turnplayer made. That would create even more reloads and more opportunities for any irregular action.  
AFAIK Makahlua is their official turn player, so if she didn't follow the official orders in her original turn, well then that's IMHO bad luck for PEACE. If they don't think she plays well, they should search another turnplayer.
This situation with reloads and (un)official turns etc made me think about another hypothetical scenario. I was wondering, what would you decide if a member, who is not at all an official turnplayer, without permission played the turn well before the deadline has passed, and clearly diverged from the official orders already written at that moment?
There is the case of Jamski playing the turn and declaring Vendetta on the Angels IIRC, but that was when the Hive deadline had already long passed, so that's a special case AFAIK.
Recently t_ras also posted the Hive turn while there was apparently an order wrong executed, but I don't know what is t_ras' position in the Hive, and to what degree he misplayed the turn, so I don't know if that resembles my hypothetical situation above.
Just asking so I know more clearly what the rules are. 
quote:
And now they're whining in their private forums about the "lack of a truly neutral CMN" |
Reply something back about the lack of a truly fairplaying faction? 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Googlie
|
 |
Commanding Officer, CRYPTEIA
Apr 1999
time: 21:33
|
|
Actually .......... I wouldn't have ruled the PEACE actions as a cheat, but in light of the past "bias" assertions re CyCon-PEACE issues I abrogated all decision-making to Tass.
Reasons for not considering it a cheat:
The originally-played Maki turn was never posted to the turn-reporting thread, so (unlike the Hive's when Jamski played it) never was the official turn. It was simply put up internally as a midturn save.
She had not followed turn orders in playing the turn (but there was a history of her not doing that)
Herc played the turn following the turn orders, and in the correct sequence sold the CC at LA.
Realizing that in all probability LA was going to be lost, he thought "what the heck - might as well go out in a blaze of glory", so replayed attacking the CyCon units from the base.
Note that we are allowing these "test" playings - not to "try for a different result" - but rather as strategic planning exercises
To his surprise, the attackers from the base came out ahead.
So if orders had been followed (CC sold first to raise cash) and the simulation been done first, there would have been no Maki reload message. And if someone such as FlameFlash or JohnDMuller had played the turn, then sent the save to Maki to post, no reload message would have been received. The issue then would have been "what's the deal with the odds changing when the Command Center gets sold"
And I don't think that the CC selling and then attacking could be considered an "exploit", as no-one knew that it worked that way. There are many quirks in smac/x and who knows why the odds increased - perhaps the programming that way was intentional.
But I did pass responsibility to Tass for the ruling on this one and promised to support it
(Note that I have not shared these thoughts with PEACE. They are still smarting from my "It's Ok for the CyCon to steal Doc Init" ruling - and the irony of the CyCon accusing them of cheating in this latest episode is not lost on them)
G.
Last edited by Googlie on 17-02-2004 at 21:12
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GeoModder
|
 |
The most erratic Overlord!
Jan 2004
time: 06:33
|
|
Woaw, seems like I'm playing here with quite some misunderstandings.
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie
The originally-played Maki turn was never posted to the turn-reporting thread, so (unlike the Hive's when Jamski played it) never was the official turn. It was simply put up internally as a midturn save. |
So a midsave isn't a 'holy grail', thus in disagreeing with it within the faction and letting another player replay it with other orders is allowed? Even better if that new player hasn't opened yet the turn, so no 'reload' message is attached. Ok, I can follow in that, but still, there were multiple reloads attached, thus that was very suspicious for other factions.
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie
Note that we are allowing these "test" playings - not to "try for a different result" - but rather as strategic planning exercises |
I have done so once and was rebuked by my faction mates for fore-playing. Do we here in CyCon live all under this misunderstanding then?
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie And I don't think that the CC selling and then attacking could be considered an "exploit", as no-one knew that it worked that way. There are many quirks in smac/x and who knows why the odds increased - perhaps the programming that way was intentional.
|
Yes, I already agreed earlier that in this sequence their is no cheat involved. That only left the 'reloads' for faction outsiders.
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie (Note that I have not shared these thoughts with PEACE. They are still smarting from my "It's Ok for the CyCon to steal Doc Init" ruling - and the irony of the CyCon accusing them of cheating in this latest episode is not lost on them) |
Was before my time, and haven't found this discussion so far. Would someone care to give a link to this cheating allegation on CyCon?
Anyway, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, Googlie. It smartens me up 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maniac
|
|
Gent, Belgium
Jul 1999
time: 06:33
|
|
I have the same feeling as GeoModder. All what you're saying here comes as quite a big surprise to me, and is from what I understand essentially throwing overboard the "no-playing-ahead" and "no-reload" rules we agreed upon at the start of this game. Have I and presumably many other cyborgs been wrong for 56 years? 
quote:
Originally posted by Googlie
The originally-played Maki turn was never posted to the turn-reporting thread, so (unlike the Hive's when Jamski played it) never was the official turn. It was simply put up internally as a midturn save. |
In all PBEMs (except the current "Claustrophobia" PBEM) and also this one IIRC reloads are not allowed, and thus I presumed it logically follows that once a move - by the turnplayer or any other member - is made, it's final and needs to be executed in the final turn. There is for example the case of a non-turnplayer pirate moving around a probe skimship and thus discovering our invasion force, while in the official turn the probe skimship moved in another direction. This was ruled as breaching the rules back then. Not anymore?
quote:
She had not followed turn orders in playing the turn (but there was a history of her not doing that) |
That's annoying of course when that happens, but if the above rule is followed, the moves Makahlua made should be the final ones. And if there is a history of her not following orders, why then not elect another turnplayer? Then they won't be faced with these troubles.
quote:
Note that we are allowing these "test" playings - not to "try for a different result" - but rather as strategic planning exercises |
That's absolutely the first I hear of this.  Have other factions this already done regularly? But so you say I would be allowed to do as many reloads and test plays as I want for the sake of strategic planning? If it are just for testing out domestic former & crawler orders etc, I don't see any problem, but if military or exploration unit movement will happen that turn, I don't see how you can be certain that the turnplayer isn't just trying to get better combat results, better unity pod pop results or do some exploring while claiming to do some "strategic planning".
quote:
So if orders had been followed (CC sold first to raise cash) and the simulation been done first, there would have been no Maki reload message. And if someone such as FlameFlash or JohnDMuller had played the turn, then sent the save to Maki to post, no reload message would have been received. |
I agree. But that's not the situation that happened.
quote:
And I don't think that the CC selling and then attacking could be considered an "exploit", as no-one knew that it worked that way. There are many quirks in smac/x and who knows why the odds increased - perhaps the programming that way was intentional. |
I agree. After you had confirmed that those battle results were perfectly "normal" and did not indicate cheating, that was no longer a problem IMO. The fact of the reloads still was an issue though, and I assumed that's why Tassadar made his ruling to do a replay.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-02-2004 12:55
Nice and fairplay team 
" and "
after a while. 
|