 |
|  |
 |
|
Exile
|
 |
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000 time: 23:24
|
|
For what it's worth;
A quick glance at the PBEM forum will reveal that there are a good number of them designed by yours truly. It was formerly the case that, when one of my scenarios was complete, I would happily advertise it in a thread and request a PBEM test run. Hopefully, I don't have to go into WHY a test run is advisable.
However . . .
When a player cheats in one of the test runs (and, IIRC, that did indeed occur), it tends to spoil, at least partially, my intent in conducting the test run in the first place. Not to mention how frustrating it is. Sadly, I watched these test runs and other PBEMs using my scenarios and, to be absolutely honest, I picked out the cheaters before anyone else did. I KNOW certain things about my own scenarios and could tell very quickly that some events taking place were not right.
I kept quiet about it, however.
I just read the hot debates about cheaters and listing them and felt that I should express my own opinion.
For the record;
I support the list.
WHY?
It will tell me immediately who NOT to allow into a test run. I have my own agenda here--to produce a quality scenario. That agenda is compromised by cheaters. I don't like that. I want to know.
Some info on moi;
I am; 44 years old, have been on ACS longer than most everyone else commenting on this issue so far (with the exceptions of Techumseh and St. Leo), overeducated, professional historian.
This is MY OPINION and NOT debatable. The responses I would like to see in this thread will, hopefully, come from other scenario designers. Please NOTE THIS!
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Exile
|
 |
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000 time: 23:24
|
|
Thanks for the contributions to this thread from St. Leo, Techumseh, Case, and John. The fraternity of Civ2 scenario designers is a small one and I didn't know what kind of response I'd get. I'd still like to hear from Paul, Stephan, Bernd, Carl, and the Magyar crusader on this.
Thanks also to the non-designers.
Tech is correct and I agree with him; I don't want to see the same tired issues brought up. The whole business seems painfully clear to me;
Verified cheater = ON THE LIST
I don't see any controversy here. If someone does, then I'd suggest they drop the dramatics and get real.
(Probably an unrealistic request )
What I'm after are the opinions and comments of my fellow designers. PBEM is a relatively new phenomenon in the Civ2 world, one that, modesty aside, I feel that I had a strong hand in initiating (though not the only hand, by any means). The fact that anyone DID cheat in these games frankly surprised me. I suppose that it shouldn't have, but it did. I'm curious to see the reactions of the rest of the "fraternity" and see how they feel. I can imagine that I don't feel quite as betrayed as the actual players in the PBEMs, however. For me, it was simply frustrating.
BUT . . .
There is also this; If someone either inside or outside of a given PBEM is watching the game, trying to determine for themselves whether or not one of mine is a quality scenario or not, the antics of a cheater can give a skewed impression of what the scenario is and how it works, thus undermining the work I've put into it to make it a quality scenario.
Further commentary?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Exile
|
 |
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000 time: 23:24
|
|
John, I'll give you an example of how I was able to determine cheating was going on in Imp1870 in one PBEM game.
I made the city of Fez a very tough nut to crack. It's virtually impossible to take without the use of rifled artillery or very, very many cannon units. In the dozens of games I've played myself, it usually takes no less than 8-10 rifled artillery units, most of which perish in the process. With cannons only, it would be FAR more difficult. In the game I saw, a player was able to take Fez on either turn 2 or 3. No rifled artillery was available. This shouldn't have been possible. Why? Because the scenario's extra-high production costs for units would prevent ANY player from constructing enough cannons, and then get them to the location, to successfully assault and seize the city. When I saw this happen, I knew what was going on, but couldn't determine myself exactly what to do about it. It wasn't a test run set up by myself, so I felt compelled to keep quiet and allow the other players to eventually discover it themselves. Try to put yourself in my place here. What would you do?
There are other signs to watch, however. Units moving between turns when they're not supposed to is a strong indicator that someone inside the game is cheating.
The other guys have more technical methods of detecting cheating.
The cheaters either DO confess (usually after being caught ), or they disappear--a tacit confession, AFAIAC.
Verification, as it has been conducted, is OBJECTIVE and can easily be proven.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Darius871
|
 |
Smith, Wesson, and the RODINA!!!
Mar 2002 time: 23:24
|
|
quote: I would rather see the odd innocent punished here |
This shouldn't even be discussed because it can't happen. As Exile and conmcb25 made clear, cheating is objective and can be confirmed beyond a doubt. If any idiot posts an unsubstantiated accusation on the list, the accusation will (hopefully) be deleted and the poster's reputation will be ruined. This is why everybody's worries about 'witch hunts' are completely unfounded.
quote: Actually, we've already HAD this discussion (several times), it's been divisive, and I don't want to repeat it just 'cause Exile missed out on it the first few times. |
Agreed. I value his input on this, but the thread should not turn into another debates. Let creators voice their concerns and that's it, instead of us being redundant.
quote: When I saw this happen, I knew what was going on, but couldn't determine myself exactly what to do about it. It wasn't a test run set up by myself, so I felt compelled to keep quiet and allow the other players to eventually discover it themselves. Try to put yourself in my place here. What would you do? |
Sorry, but frankly I don't agree with your decision. The turns in Imperialism 1870 and the diplomacy on the thread are very time consuming, and I wouldn't have let people play through a half dozen rounds until they eventually figure it out themselves. I wouldn't have posted 'OMFG Eivind's an f'ing cheater', but I would have just privately contacted one of the players or Duke of Marlbrough and let them handle it, perhaps under the guise of a random check. Eivind's cheating was flagrant and could have been proven and announced in a matter of hours.
Last edited by Darius871 on 13-12-2002 at 08:26
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Exile
|
 |
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000 time: 23:24
|
|
Now I don't want anyone to feel left out , so perhaps I should also mention that I'd like to hear from Henrik, JayBee, Kindal, FMK, DarthVeda, John Petroski, Markus Eklund, Michael Daumen, William Keenen, Harlan Thompson, Mr. Temba, Mattias Koster, Hendrik the Great, and yes, even Kobayashi.
If I've forgotten anyone else, the omission was entirely inadvertent.
(I don't think we'll hear from some of these folks, though, which is too bad)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Choke
|
|
I think scenario designers ought to help find cheaters when and if they're called upon and the creator of a scenario should be the one to determine whether cheating has taken place as long as they're not in the game. While I haven't created any scenario for Civ2 that have been played by anyone but me I have made some for myself and have made scens in other games like Panzer General 2 so I have some understanding of how disapointing it would be to have the perception of your scenario scewed by a cheater.
[St Leo's Edit: Flowers are purty.]
Last edited by St Leo on 14-12-2002 at 09:48
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|