 |
|  |
 |
|
SlowThinker
|
|
homeless, Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2000 time: 06:30
|
|
I found a poll about that (Replaying the Same Turn Multiple Times ) and I must react...
If you allow reloading then attacking units can win every combat. It would be better to give every unit attack 50 and defense 1 in rules.txt and reloading of combats wouldn't be needed...
But I don't think a game where an attacker always wins is very interesting...
quote: Originally posted by Kull
For me (and I think this is true of most others here), this is a matter of personal honor. |
I think this is a matter of foolishness.
I play the game because of thrill from anticipation, sense of responsibility for own decisions and all those similar entertaining things. People that reload (or cheat other way) lose all that.
I understand that some people may prefer win to everything other, or to have an easy game without running into problems or having to think. But then they should play SP, go to cheat menu, and reach the Alpha Centauri in 3900BC.
There is no midway between these two approaches. If you count with a possibility you will reload (or cheat) then you lose that entertaining elements.
quote: Originally posted by Chris 62
I have played in plenty of PBEMs, if you need to replay your turn for perfect results, who cares? |
I care. I would not take defense factor of my unit in if I supposed others players reload.
An entertaining point in Civ2 is planning. For planning you need some assumptions. For assumptions you need that players respect some rules.
quote: Originally posted by Kull
When he says "who cares", Chris is at least correct in that ... this issue is miniscule in the big scheme of things. |
I disagree. Reloading is not limited. With reloading you can win every combat.
quote: Originally posted by St Leo
However, it's not cheating. |
Players should always agree on some house rules for each game. Then it is clear what is cheating and what is not. I wonder how most games start without a rule agreement.
But even with no rules I would consider it as clear cheating. You break unaffected flow of the game. I don't see a difference between reloading and adding one unit by hexediting every turn.
In Seeds of Greatness PBEM we are preparing a following rule:
quote: You can reload typos and similar mistakes ONLY under following conditions:
1. You can take back only 1 'action'. Action is
a movement or another order to one unit
rushbuild
improvement sale
2. You didn't intend to execute that action, you did it by mistake.
3. The action cannot be taken back if ANY kind of new information is revealed by that action (new terrain is revealed, a new unit is detected, a formerly revealed square has changed (an irrigation is built on it, a foreign city has changed size etc.)...).
4. You can NEVER take back fortuitous actions: combats, hut popping, tech stealing etc.
5. You must correctly repeat all actions between the last save and the mistake that is taken back. The game cannot be reloaded if there is any fortuitous action (combat, hut popping, tech stealing etc.) among actions that are to be repeated (so it is suggested to save after combats, hut popping etc.).
|
Last edited by SlowThinker on 02-09-2003 at 21:36
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
EZRhino
|
 |
Sunset and the evening star/ And one clear call for me.
Jun 2002 time: 21:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by SlowThinker
I think reloading needn't to be cheating. If players agree that everybody can conjure up one settler per turn by hexediting then everything is OK.
|
I dont think there is any need for sarcasm Slowthinker. If there is no way of policing this, then why are we even arguing about it?
Last edited by EZRhino on 08-09-2003 at 23:52
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SlowThinker
|
|
homeless, Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2000 time: 06:30
|
|
I am sorry to be confusing: that smile was for the first sentence only.
Players may have different opinions - one may consider incremental rushbuy as bad, another one can consider a game with one new settler per turn as interesting (OK, I go to extremes). Anyway I think clear house rules for every game would be very beneficial.
quote: Originally posted by EZRhino
If there is no way of policing this, then why are we even arguing about it? |
1. It is interesting
2. It may be beneficial (I think it is good that people inclined to reloading and/or cheating perceive that they lose the most entertaining elements of the game)
About policing reloading - there would be a way how to appease feelings that another player was reloading: logs. When the game finishes you could read that not all huts of your more prosperous opponent contained 100 gold and not all his warriors killed heavy infantry.
But I can understand many people might consider logs detaining.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SlowThinker
|
|
homeless, Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2000 time: 06:30
|
|
I think there is much less cheaters than suspicion... And I think both suspect and cheating are bad ... and both could be solved by logs (they would be published after the game ends).
Say you read from a log that a player got 100 gold from 5 huts in a row. You needn't to accuse him from cheating, or to care if he cheated or not. But everybody sees he won because he was very lucky.
This is not good for a cheater: he wants to show he is strong, not lucky.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|