27-11-2001 03:16									#1
	Legitimate vs Cheating Strategies Increase the size of your Attachments

In any computer game, whether it be Civ3, EU2, etc. there will be certain loopholes or exploits that clever players might notice and use to advantage to beat the computer. However, most of these strategies really should be considered forms of cheating rather than as legitimate gameplay.

Some players find joy in trying to figure any and all possible loopholes in the game to exploit in order to win. However I take pleasure in playing the game as realistically as possible. Therefore I claim any strategy is really cheating if it does any of the following:

(1) Accomplishes something that was clearly unintended by the game designers.
(2) Accomplishes something that simply would make no sense whatsoever and is totally unrealistic.
(3) Accomplishes something which the AI is obviously not programmed to counter.

This is not an exhaustive list but does demonstrate the basic idea.

This is a good thread to compile a list of exploitative/cheating strategies as well as discuss this topic in general. My ultimate goal is to compile a list for realistic-style players that should be followed if one wishes to avoid (even unintentionally) cheating against the computer.

	27-11-2001 03:38									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Sorry, I have to disagree with your concept.
Since everyone's knowledge, experience and perspective are different, what is 'cheating' to one is hunkey-dorey to another. It's all individual choice.

You cannot (ie, it is unwise) to try to impose your ideals on another with this game. It has been created to be modifiable so each can get their own greatest value out of it.

The best you can do is try to come up with some guideliines for multi-player games.

	27-11-2001 03:52									#3
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I, on the other hand, would note that the exploiting of loopholes does matter if individuals are going to make claims on this forum regarding their success. The large numbers cheat (9999999 gold from or to the AI) or the sell them a city and promptly retake it exploitation can be used in the game but reflect no reality. War for resources orprovoking an attack are legitimate and intended design decisions. So, play anyway you want, you bought the game. However, don't come here and say the game is "easy" or that you are good at it if you figured a way around the rules and/or the programming.

	27-11-2001 04:10									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, I think cheating is doing what is obviously a problematic loophole, like the 999999999 gold cheat. If you don't call that cheating, you've got really, really lax rules. Jaybe, you don't think that's "personal choice" do you?

That said, I think beating games means finding ways to beat the AI/system of the game. I think IFE is a legit strategy. You can think of it as planting trees and cutting it down for more lumber. Now, putting more workers making the trees grow faster could be problematic, but maybe you can think of it as putting more workers will make more trees grow. Who knows. That I think is not cheating.

As to taking and selling a city back.... you can still think of it as a problem in the AI in that while the computer values a city X as 6 gold per turn + 30 gold in Lump Sum (what you sell for), but they're not willing to give you 6 gold per turn and 30 gold lump sum when you sue for peace, while they do give you that city. I find it the case that sometimes things like this happen -- what is clearly equivilent to the AI don't seem to be so in negotiations, so in those cases, I don't think it's cheating to take a city, sell it back. If you can take it again.... why not? Unless you change the whole structure of the game, this is always going to be there. Games are like that... there are always things that seem somewhat on the edge of legit, but you have to live with it or else you make a different game.

	27-11-2001 04:34									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

MarshalN, good to see you again. I agree, and withdraw my sell, take, resell, retake point. I also think IFE is within the program parameters. HOW more workers make trees grow faster is clearly metaphysical, not scientific, but the programmers put it in there, so it's legit. As to the relative value of cities, techs, etc., the programmers limitations will be meaningless in MP, since the humans can make their own choices. I only ask that if one is exploiting a clear loophole, don't brag about the results here, especially without noting that exploitation. One can win easily at any level easily if a few $100,000 to $10,000,000 bonuses come into play.

	27-11-2001 05:06									#6
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I think there should be a mid-way between the two arguments.

If you use something that obviously wasnt intended for normal gameplay (Ie GODMODE in fps', the cheat menu in Civ2) or a bug (The 1m gold bug, the Dupe bug in Diablo) then it should be regarded as cheating, and not a "legitimate" strategy.

However, if you find a way to beat the AI in a clever way that the game designers didnt think of then great, you deserve your win, and its not cheating, as you were playing within the boundaries of the game.

Remember, this only applies if you wish to compete with other players, or brag about what level you beat, but if its for your own enjoyment do whatever you want with the game.

	27-11-2001 08:43									#7
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Who really cares what someone claims to have done on this board? If they cheated to get there, then they are probably missing out on a big part of the fun in the game, but it's their choice. Now if this were for money, I would have my knife in my boot...

	27-11-2001 09:54									#8
	Support Apolyton

Blaupanzer? I don't think I recognize the name. Blue Baron??

	27-11-2001 10:02									#9
	Multiplayer... Remove this text

The problem will come about with multiplayer games, but these rules can be agreed upon before. Recently i had a multiplayer mathc with 2 friends on civ2, and they seem to believe that bribing each others units is unfair? I just wish there wasnt so many of these cheats, like in civ2. It is quite frustrating to not play as best you could, because it is cheating!

	27-11-2001 10:09									#10
	Re: Legitimate vs Cheating Strategies Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by polypheus Therefore I claim any strategy is really cheating if it does any of the following: (1) Accomplishes something that was clearly unintended by the game designers. (2) Accomplishes something that simply would make no sense whatsoever and is totally unrealistic. (3) Accomplishes something which the AI is obviously not programmed to counter.

You realize, of course, that the AI itself may be programmed to "cheat." Witness the uber-triremes, the instant wonders, and the invisible caravans in Civs 1 and 2.

Now, in Civ 3, I have not seen that the AI "cheats" anywhere (yet), but according to your second rule, there's no way a bunch of guys in grass skirts hurling wooden spears knocks off my mech infantry! (And, yes, I think lumberjacking is lame.)

Now, I do agree with your post; in D&D, this is called "munchkinism." To this end, I will take my licks whenever I hit a bad hut in the early game and not reload. But if I decide by around 1AD that the map is poor, I will restart (I did drop $50US on it, after all!)

How's THAT for a first post?

	27-11-2001 10:27									#11
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I agree with Poly. It is not a case of one person seeing it as fair and others as cheating. We can disagree on what is a cheat, but if you use a hole that is not intented to be there (and may not be fixed) and claim it is not cheating, that is just a rationalization, same as thiefs and drug users do. I have not played enough to know the game inside out, but claims of getting stealth in 1300 AD do not sound legit to me. IFE is a case of reasonable doubt, 9999999 is just someone looking for holes. I do not see winning with that as rewarding. Finding the hole may be rewarding, but using it is the same as looking at the cards your kid is holding. Oops, I guess some with not have a problem with that.

	27-11-2001 20:46									#12
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I agree with mgblst. What you do playing by yourself is your own business. Unless you come here to brag. Then you must limit yourself to what's generally accepted.

For MP, we're fortunate to have the sp experience knowing that MP will come so we can start discussions. With CivII, MP kinda just showed up and coming to a general concensus took lots of experience and a lot of the argueing ruined many a game. It took almost 3 months before people even knew what should be discussed before a game started. Then another few months before there was any agreement.

Fortunately the 15 to 20 people that I played with finally came to concensus and "RAH" rules (I was always annoyed by that designation, but I think that's why they use it) became the standard. As a result almost all argueing ceased during games and it no longer took 3 hours setting up games while everyone hashed out what rules would be used. I've played hundreds of MP games over the last few years, with NO arguements. This helps keep the game fun and desirable for replay. Now we get on ICQ and someone asks what rules are we using, Someone says RAH rules and after 2 minutes of reading off the list, we're playing. Beats the old days by a lot.

We need to start these discussions NOW. Granted different groups will want different settings, but at least we'll get an idea of what issues should be discussed. A lot of issues will dissapear in MP, if there are no AIs in the game. (if not by patches) Unfair negotiating will dissappear. Selling a city to just reclaim it will be considered fine if you can find someone dumb enough to pay for it. But there will ALWAYS be issues.


Rich

	28-11-2001 04:47									#13
	Re: Legitimate vs Cheating Strategies Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by polypheus (1) Accomplishes something that was clearly unintended by the game designers.

It deserves repeating: If you can accomplish something that was clearly unintended by the game designers, the fault lies with -the game designers.

There is a cure for that. It´s called thorough playtesting.

Unfortunately Firaxis got that wrong, and replaced it by no playtesting.

	28-11-2001 04:56									#14
	Put an end to popups!

Since this is a single player game, whether something is legitimate tactics or cheesey cheating is a moot point. You should play the game the way you want to. And if you feel that you must use cheesey tactics, then in the end you are really just cheating yourself out of a great gaming experience.

	28-11-2001 05:18									#15
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

It is self-evident that people can play however they want. But the point I was trying to make is what others here have already alluded to. If you want a good gaming experience you should try to play as realistically as possible and avoid exploiting loopholes and such.

Of course thorough playtesting can eliminate many loopholes but it is simply impossible to eliminate them all. And the fact of the matter is that abstaining from using the loopholes is almost as good as if the loopholes were closed via upgrades or patches.

Therefore, for the realistic minded game players who play for the best game experience possible (instead of playing to "beat up" the computer via exploiting loopholes), which of the strategies that have been posted should be considered legitimate and which strategies should be considered loophole exploitation and therefore really cheating?

Any takers?

	28-11-2001 08:41									#16
	Full PM-box? Change here!

You have to go the minimalist route. Build a consensus and ban only the worst exploits.

The only two things I can off the top of my head come up with are the money cheat and turn reloading. This would be for comparative SP games.

Multiplayer is going to be a huge problem. Lets say you are in a game with 4 humans and 4 AI. You happen to be the lucky guy that moves immediately after the AI. You then get the first crack at buying new tech from one and selling to the other AI. You then get to see what resources that have suddenly been revealed by the new tech. You get to exploit your position in the movement order. You get to set up MPP and Military Alliances before the others do. This can get messy.

I don't even know the turn order yet. Has anyone got that pegged yet.

I have a headache just thinking about this.

	28-11-2001 09:30									#17
	Got spare money?

I would like to propose another general guideline to point out obvious "cheats". Actually, to remove the semantic argument, let's call them "unfair" or "unsportsmanlike" instead of "cheats":

4) Anything that would never be useable against a human opponent.

Notice the word never, lots of things that would occasionally work are OK. Some "unfair" things won't be covered by this point, but I think it is worth thinking about when evaluating things...

- Trading a tech or selling a city for an unusually high price is OK, all players face the same AI.
-Getting lucky and entering the tech trading cycle first is OK, you got lucky.
-IFE is OK, it would work just as well against humans.
-Blockading with privateers is OK.
-Breaking treaties is of course OK. If they give you RoP, have fun!
-Abandoning and rebuilding cities to eliminate oppression or move your palace is OK, it would work just as well against humans.
-Making AI vassals is OK.

-Selling and re-taking cities _more than once_ is definitely out.
-Doing so the first time if you have a force already built up in view and waiting to take it is probably out.
-Moving privateers along with a BB or some other ship of your own is out, no human would attack them "unknowingly".
-The million dollar bug is out.
-Razing the same city over and over again to stifle AI expansion is out, humans would just expand the other way.

I'm sure there are others, but for the most part I personally don't believe very much that has been posted should be considered "unfair".

	28-11-2001 11:02									#18
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

There is so much that will have to be changed. ROP for example. If they leave it as in mixed human and AI games there would have to be a rush to knock out an AI before your opponent. Thats cheesy.

	28-11-2001 15:20									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

'That said, I think beating games means finding ways to beat the AI/system of the game. I think IFE is a legit strategy. You can think of it as planting trees and cutting it down for more lumber. Now, putting more workers making the trees grow faster could be problematic, but maybe you can think of it as putting more workers will make more trees grow. Who knows. That I think is not cheating.'

Here's a quick way to figure out if the designers actually wrote the game with IFE in mind: compare its effectiveness to everything else in the game. It takes ten production and one population to build a worker, one gold in upkeep to keep the worker around, ten turns to plant the trees, and ten turns to cut the trees back down for ten production. If you ignore the minimal startup costs, then over the long-term:

Depotism: .5 production per gold.
Monarchy: .5 production per gold.
Communism: .5 production per gold.
Republic: .5 production per gold.
Democracy: 1 production per gold.

In other words, it's four times as effective as wealth, and twice as effective as rush-buying. You can practically play the game focusing just on this; drop zillions of cities all over the map just to get the 4/city or more worker support under depotism/monarchy/communism. Why on earth would they intentionallly do this? Did Sid want to lure everyone into coming down with carpal tunnel syndrome?

Myself, I refuse to do it, as it seems ludicrous, kind of like individually checking every city you have every single turn. Sure, it may help you "win", but it sounds more tedious than fun. Chopping down trees that are already there is much less offensive to my sensibilities; it's a small bonus that actually has a downside (for areas with no 2 production squares) early in the game. If I have to do it all goddamn game, why not let me individually tell the workers in factories what to do? Or push the farmers across the rows of wheat, clicking once for each swing of the scythe? ;0

If this is what it takes to win on Diety, I'll stick to the lower difficulty levels. It reminds me of supply crawlers in SMAC, except there's even more busywork.

	28-11-2001 20:31									#20
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

My old basketball coach in highschool once told me

"Its not cheating if you dont get caught"

I dont cheat but I just thought i would throw that in

	29-11-2001 00:30									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The entire issue of Cheat/Exploit is disingenuous.

You bought the game. If you're having fun -- go for it!

	29-11-2001 03:21									#22
	Increase Your PM Length

jimmy:
RoP is a tough one, but I think it's OK to use it to your advantage. The reason is that there's a built-in penalty for exploiting it: no other AI will ever sign RoP with you, and it takes you one step closer to not being able to ever trade anything per turn to the AI. Also, just because you took out an AI first, another player can still sign RoP and also take out an AI. Maybe you think the penalty isn't stiff enough, but that's an issue you have with the game design, not an issue of fairness. This might be a personal taste thing, whether you want a lot of early wars or not, but I don't believe it should be considered "unfair". (oh, and I don't do this in my own games, just fyi)

Elowan:
You and the others who have posted similar sentiments are simply wrong. No one in this thread is trying to force you to play like "we" want you to. We are trying to establish a set of rules so that people can compare game results fairly, and so that future MP games aren't played differently by different players (in the same game). That is not at all disingenuous, nor is it a waste of time. A great example is the Apolyton tournament game. If there was a way to prevent anyone from save/reloading, then the results would be much more reliable. Of course other exploits are also available, and that's what we're trying to discuss.

One more time for the cheap seats:

Of course you can play the game and have fun any way in which you'd like. Use the editor as well as any exploits you feel comfortable with to your hearts' content.

There's no reason to keep posting this idea over and over on this thread.

The point, as someone already wrote, is that if you're going to brag or compare game tactics, scores, or results, then you should be playing the same game everyone else is playing, and that means the editor and certain "unfair" techniques should not be used.

	29-11-2001 09:24									#23
	Confessions of a chronic reloader Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I think this falls in the realm of "playing the game the way you like to".

I'm on my second full game now and, like the first full one I played, I find myself doing quite a bit of reloading...ESPECIALLY at the start of the game. At the start of my current game, I reloaded a good 7 times before I placed my first city in the best spot I could find. The 6 turn of auto-saves allows me to go back and correct mistakes I made recently, but after midway through the Ancient Age does not allow for a complete reworking of my strategy. I'm only in the habit of manually saving before major undertakings (ie. war) so reverting to a previous manual save can let me take a different tack in my strategy.

For example, in my current game I'm making a grab for the whole world's oil resources (all of which are reasonably close to me). Having no supply of rubber, and with France having rubber nearby and holding a couple of the oil tiles, I thought I'd try a short war to take the oil and rubber while waging war on Germany, the Iriquois (weak), and the Russians (decimated by me in the early game), all of which held the oil tiles.

Well, my infantry and cavalry weren't quite up to the task of defeating the French infantry so I thought I'd go back to 1 turn pre-war and try it again, this time buying rubber from the Americans for 1000 gold and getting some tanks. Now I control all but 1 oil tile (the Iriquois will be losing that shortly).

So am I having fun playing this way? YOU BET!! I love going back and seeing how things could have been different by trying a different strat. It could be that I'm still actually playtesting and that I will, in time, reload less, but for now I'm having a great time playing this way. However, some people might consider this blatant cheating.

So my point is, the only way you can cheat in SP is by making the game less fun for yourself. You have no problem with getting 9999999 gold? You still have fun playing when you do it? Are you having fun micromanaging 30 workers every turn on IFE? Then by all means do it. If it's no fun for you to do these things then you most likely won't.

	29-11-2001 11:29									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I am not sure why this IFE is raised in this issue as I see near universal acceptance of it.
Your old coach is amoral or ignorant, I would lean toward ignorant as he/she was paid to teach children. Cheating or stealing is wrong even if you are not caught. Think about the times you were cheated or had someting stolen from you. We are not debating that point, we are talking about what constitutes cheating in Civ3.

	29-11-2001 13:35									#25
	Tired of ads?

You know, this whole IFE business reminds me of a loophole/bug in CivI. If you told a worker to irrigate, for example, and then clicked on it, you could order it to irrigate again. You could repeat this process until the worker had completed the task, all in the same turn.

I guess you could legitimize it by saying "well, I just stood by him and inspired him to work faster with my persistent leadership" (insert image of Montgomery Burns: "You call that irrigation!?! Dig faster! Yeees, that's it!). But still, it always seemed like I was doing something that just wasn't originally intended to be done.

I see IFE the same way. Oh, sure, it's not illegal, because the game lets you do it. But in the same way that the designers didn't intend for people, via the magic of micromanagement, to make workers do in one turn what should take eight in CivI, I don't think the designers intended for people to increase the shield production of a city via IFE in CivIII.

Yes, I know corruption is cripplingly high. And, admittedly, IFE is a creative way around the problem. But so is editing the game to eliminate corruption completely. Sure, you can do these things, but at what point do you modify the game so much that you are no longer playing CivIII? After all, if you can pick up the soccer ball and run with it, you’re not playing soccer anymore, you’re playing rugby (more or less…).

Lastly, I agree with everyone who has said that it’s inappropriate to fiddle with the rules to make the game easier to play according to your own personal style and then, after having thoroughly crushed the AI, come a-runnin’ to the message boards to crow about how frightfully clever you are in that you beat the AI on “deity” by 2050 BC. There’s a difference between modifying the game to make it more fun and changing it to make it easier to claim bragging rights. If you don’t understand the difference, well, perhaps you should work on that little self-esteem problem you undoubtedly have….

	29-11-2001 20:19									#26
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I think the easy fix for IFE is to make forest grow the same no matter how many workers there are. Then I think it's very realistic and can be used -- you chop them down, you plant them, you chop them down again, sort of like a tree farm. I don't think anybody will have problems with that. Problem right now is just that with 4 or 5 workers the trees grow much faster.... which can seem silly to some people.

Not that I ever use IFE. It's too much of a pain to do that stuff. I hate micromanaging to that point.

	29-11-2001 22:30									#27
	Inflate your Upload Space

I do not use it either as it is too much trouble. One thing I hate is the late part o the game when you may have 100 workers and it takes a fairly long time to have their turn. I capture 3 or more in every city I take. I often send them some where to be disband, just to keep the game moving. I was watching the AI send 8-20 workers to the same area and it is painful.

	30-11-2001 01:29									#28
	Inflate your Upload Space

I'm all for Marshal's idea of having the forests grow at a set rate without being able to be hurried. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if that's really in the cards, as it would probably mean Firaxis would have to treat 'plant forest' very differently than any of the other worker jobs. In any case, it's a good idea.

However, I'm personally not convinced that IFE is all that powerful. There _is_ a startup cost (the workers), and a continuing cost (the upkeep of the workers or else the unit spot that the workers take up), and with pop-rushing or money-rushing as alternatives I would not be afraid of playing someone who used IFE mercilessly. Perhaps this is only because I haven't perfected it myself, but I just don't think it breaks the game in any way whatsoever. So I say: let 'em do it!

I did find another "cheat", however:

- Using workers as bait to draw out AI attacking forces so you can crush them in a counter attack is out.

- Using a wall of workers to try and prevent attacking units from getting at the "good stuff" by using up their attack is OK. If you want to sac that many workers, I'll walk slowly along and soak them up.

The difference here is whether or not you are counting on an AI fanning out to take all the workers while ignoring your forces and ending up vulnerable, or if you're just trying to absorb a few attacks before the AI or (future) human goes to work on your forces.

	30-11-2001 01:35									#29
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Lastly, I agree with everyone who has said that it’s inappropriate to fiddle with the rules to make the game easier to play according to your own personal style and then, after having thoroughly crushed the AI, come a-runnin’ to the message boards to crow about how frightfully clever you are in that you beat the AI on “deity” by 2050 BC.

What, you mean it's wrong to modify my Jaguar Warrior and give it 100.100.100? Man, I love discovering and conquering the whole map in a couple of turns!

e

	30-11-2001 02:18									#30
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Everyone forgot one more thing, which everyone probably is using, but which is definitely a cheat - Palace trick!

I mean building something only to switch to another thing when you have the ability... Hehe, though how else would I possibly build a wonder before AI does?

But from the above made points this one falls under "absurd" category - switching half way from Lighthouse to Sistine Chapel etc...