 |
| |
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
A got shamed for something that I think is a grey area, but some of you might have some strong feelings about it.
What do you do if you are about even with your pact mate, but they are rushing ahead in tech and trying to build the Hunter-Seeker Algorythm? You offer to trade tech with them or even buy tech, but they don't negotiate.
Obviously you must get the tech if you hope to win. The ethical question is "should you probe them or declare V'detta and then probe them?
Well of course I did the first and I got shamed for it. I'm not sure if its wrong or not. What do you folks think?
I would like to start off with a word of defense on my part. I didn't want to end the pact or go to war with them, but I had to get the tech. This was the only real solution to do that.
What is your 2 cents?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grosjos
|
|
Creston B.C. Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
Sounds like some real world diplomacy to me. I think it is ok, it is now up to your pact mate on whether they should cancel the pact, declare vendetta, or let it slide. Thats what probe teams are made for.
If it is the pbem tournament then it would depend on the ground rules. I think you have to cancel your pact before you are allowed to probe or other things. Don't quote me on that though.
[This message has been edited by Grosjos (edited April 27, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sunchaser3
|
|
charlotte, NC
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
I thought that you could probe anyone at anytime without warning. The only "rule" is that you select the "declare vendetta" option AFTER the probe, which it sounds like Adam did. warning the opposition, or even your pact brother, is just silly. Probing a pact brother may be underhanded in a sense, but its not against the rules. The AI does it to my quite often. Furthermore it's just a game. If a player wasn't prepared for the possability that his "ally" might probe him, it is his own fault. If Adam had been playing the board game Risk, and had sneak attacked someone he had previosly been working with no one would question his ethics. I mean eventually they would have to fight each other, every one knows it. It is just a question of who will show their hand first.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Helium Pond
|
|
Los Anheles, California, Good Ole U S of A
Nov 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
What do you mean when you say you "got shamed?"
The most important question is, is this multiplayer or single-player?
If it's multiplayer, it's all dependent on the ground rules agreed to at the beginning of the game. If it wasn't explicitly banned, then it's fine. It may p*** off your opponent, though, and that's part of what you have to consider in multiplayer games.
I'm assuming it's multiplayer, actually, because in single-player, who cares? Go ahead and steal all you want.
So, when you say you were shamed, you mean that the other player/s accused you of playing dirty? And you want to know whether the people here think what you did was fair? Well, if the only facts given are that you would lose the game without getting the Hunter-Seeker, and your Pact mate wouldn't give it to you, I'd say your conduct was fine. But I don't believe that there's any single Secret Project that you have to have to win, so I'm not sure I can support those given circumstances.
The bottom line is, if you acted within the agreed-on rules, you're within your rights. If they're mad about it, well, that's within their rights also. They just can't say you cheated.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
sunchaser,
In PBEM, after you probe a pact mate it asks you if you want to declare v'detta on them. That is a bug. The probed pact mate should have the option to cancel the pact not the prober. To declare v'detta in this fashion is considered a cheat in the sense that it is taking advantage of a bug and there for not an intended type of play.
Helium,
Yes multiplayer. no such rule was created before the game began. Again, this is not a normal play for me. I have found that, in general, if you are in a pact with someone they will at least negotiate trading tech. That is, unless they want to make sure and build a special project. In this case my pact mate was certainly not behaving like a, as someone said, "true" pact mate.
The question here is, "is there some code of play where you renounce the pact before probing." According to everyone here, there is no code.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mongoose
|
|
Harrisburg,PA USA
Apr 1999
time: 00:13
|
|
Adam_Smith, you have it backward, as I tried to explain when Styx got all bent out of shape in 4LL.
The general consensus, at least at ACOL, is that you MUST select the 'declare vendetta' option when probing a pactmate or treatied faction.
Item of note - selecting this option does not result in vendetta if it is a pactmate. It lowers the diplomatic status to treaty.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JAMiAM
|
|
Santa Clara, CA, USoA
May 1999
time: 21:13
|
|
Adam Smith,
If you chose "declare vendetta" after probing the pact mate, then you did the "legal" thing. If you are playing to win, you also did the "ethical" thing.
If playing anything other than a game specifically set up for team play, I will always value a win by a single player, over that of a "cooperative" win. Pacts are to be honored, in general, but when they outlive their usefulness, should be abandoned.
Your case sounds like the pact was not serving you as well as it was the other player. That you were able to obtain the HSA is icing on the cake.
The downside to this, is that you will likely not have the trust of that player, through the balance of that particular game. You might get a reputation for underhanded tactics. You will have to work a little harder (diplomatically) to make sure that other players see the benefits of peaceful relations with you, rather than vendetta.
Of course, for me, the diplomatic aspect of the game, is the primary draw of multiplayer SMAC. And, if your opponents are worthy of your time, they will realize that your actions within a particular game, though indicative of general play style, do not (should not) influence your decision making, in a different game. Play each game, to its fullest, within the peculiar geopolitical context that it begins with, and develops. Weigh the results of a backstab carefully. If it will make the difference in winning or losing, do not be afraid to do it. However, do not break faith lightly, either.
Remember, that you are a leader, responsible for your people's survival and prosperity on a harsh, dangerous, and unforgiving planet. Chiron, and your enemies, would like to swallow you up. Don't let their false protestations of alleged unethical behavior keep you from securing their future.
JAMiAM
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
Mongoose,
Ok I see the problem now. Can't the probed person end the pact on the next turn without hurting their diplomacy rating? If not I can surely see why you would be mad.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
JAmaiM,
I don't think that what I did was a "backstab" It was merely liberating technology that we had a right to.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sunchaser3
|
|
charlotte, NC
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
Adam_Smith,
Yea, that's the problem. The other player doesn't know he was probed. The only player who sees the window for declare vendetta is the player who did the probe. You could probe him forever and he would never know about it, without the added risk of blaming it on someone else. That is the bug, the fact that the window appears on your turn, and never appears on your opponents turn.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kaz
|
|
San Jose, CA, USA
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
Probes don't have Faction color tags on them for one reason:
Probes are supposed to be secret.
In SP, I can sent in a wave of Probes, kill his probe teams, and as long as I can blame the probe actions on someone else, I can keep my Pact and probe an ally to my heart's content. It should be the same in MP.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sunchaser3
|
|
charlotte, NC
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
It should be that way, but it's not. In SP when you probe a pacted faction and don't shift the blame to another faction, the AI knows you probed it and will rebuke or declare war. A faction always knows it has been probed in SP, including the player. The only question is who probed.
In MP the victim of the probe is never told that he is probed. There is no need to shift the blame if you just let other player move along in his ignorance. That is a big difference. That is why, unless you managed to have another faction blamed, you should always select "declare vendetta" after you probe a pact brother.
Probes are secret up to a point in both single and multiplayer. It was never a secret that you were the victim of a probe. The only secret was who is responsible.
[This message has been edited by sunchaser3 (edited April 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
First, this problem does not exist in IP play. Another thing, why can't you just tell the person that you probed that you did so so that they can decide if they want to end the pact. Why should you have to declare V'detta. We ran into this problem in another game. Someone probed a pact mate. Then they declared V'detta, but the probed faction did not want V'detta. We had to replay.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JAMiAM
|
|
Santa Clara, CA, USoA
May 1999
time: 21:13
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_Smith on 04-28-2000 05:13 PM
First, this problem does not exist in IP play. Another thing, why can't you just tell the person that you probed that you did so so that they can decide if they want to end the pact. Why should you have to declare V'detta.
|
Because of the timing issues. In IP, and SP games, the response is essentially in real time. You have the ability to react to the probe, immediately. In PBEM/hotseat, the notification occurs when the prober is playing, not allowing the probee an opportunity to exercise a real time response. Thus, the prober could have several probe teams lined up outside of bases ready to strike all of them, in succession. This would be nearly impossible to pull off against someone in IP/SP, since the downgrading of diplomatic status is accompanied by an immediate, mutual withdrawal from each the former pactmate/treaty partners territories.
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_Smith on 04-28-2000 05:13 PM
Why should you have to declare V'detta. We ran into this problem in another game. Someone probed a pact mate. Then they declared V'detta, but the probed faction did not want V'detta. We had to replay.
|
Technically, if the probed player had previously given permission to his treaty/pact mate you do not have to choose the "declare vendetta" option. At least that is the general rule that has been adopted by the pbem community. However, those instances are few and far between. It is extremely rare that someone will grant such favors, a priori, to even the most trusted partner.
JAMiAM
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EternalSpark
|
|
Vvardenfell
Feb 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
If the rules weren't like that in the tourny, I would exploit the Probe bug all the time, cuz thats how it happens in real life. There shouldn't be any way my probe team NEEDS to be publically announced - I want the tech, and I don't want the guy I'm taking it from to know.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam_Smith
|
|
The Raisin Capital of the World
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
JaMaiM,
I think it is the general case. But the probed faction should have the option of declaring V'detta. It shouldn't be made for him.
I think that the honorable play would be to play it as if it were IP play. It certainly would not be fair to move multiple probe teams into a pact members territory and probe him, then choose to not declare V'detta, and then to probe him with the probe teams inside of his territory. That is, without discussing it with him first.
[This message has been edited by Adam_Smith (edited April 28, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Adam_Smith (edited April 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Helium Pond
|
|
Los Anheles, California, Good Ole U S of A
Nov 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
EternalSpark, Kaz, and the rest of the "probes are supposed to be secret" crew:
When you say "probes are supposed to be secret," you're redesigning the game. Probes are not supposed to be secret. At the most, as pointed out earlier in this thread, the responsibility for probes can be hidden. But the game designers never intended probes to be completely undetectable. This is a bug. If you like it that way, that's one thing. But just don't say that's the way it's supposed to be. The only ones who know how it's "supposed" to be are the game designers, and it's obvious they thought probes should never be 100% secret.
mad with the power of boldface type,
HP
[This message has been edited by Helium Pond (edited April 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13.
Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
27-04-2000 11:48
|