March Madness!

[smellymummy]

Originally posted by Trip
1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers

Two (or more) teams can get double (triple...) use of bombardment units and Workers by using the units on their respective turns, then letting their "enemy" capture and use them in turn. When facing an alliance of two civs with 20 Catapults among them, it's quite disconcerting to have to face 40 rounds of bombardment.

The simple solution is to require alliances and peace treaties to be respected through in-game diplomacy.

sure this makes sense, to stop that kind of abuse, although what if a player actually does want to stab another in the back. what if the player has too? having to be bound to a treaty until it's expiration, and under no circumstance can it be broken otherwise you'd be an exploiting player, seems to much IMO.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Ok, when do you want to start?

Now?

Tomorrow would be good.

Got a big paper due tomorrow morning that I'm working on now, so I don't really have time. But starting tomorrow afternoon I'll be ready.

You can go ahead and start things and send it to me (don't care what civ, settings, etc.). I'd start things up, but Conquests crashes when I start PBEM games.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by smellymummy
sure this makes sense, to stop that kind of abuse, although what if a player actually does want to stab another in the back. what if the player has too? having to be bound to a treaty until it's expiration, and under no circumstance can it be broken otherwise you'd be an exploiting player, seems to much IMO.

This rule only applies for players that are cooperating. If there is someone launching a legitimate invasion/backstab, then this doesn't apply for those situations.

[Paddy]

umm, is it not proper to wait on Rommel2D

I think so

[Rommel2D]

For comparison, here's CFC's list of Civ3 'cheats':

*Right of Passage Abuse
Make an agreement of Right of Passage, move your units to their main cities and attack them all at once.
*Free Palace Jump
When disbanding your capitol your palace will appear in the biggest other city. Your former capitol can be rebuilt by the settler it created. This way you've moved you capitol for free.
*Island block
If you fill the coast of a certain island with units, even non-military, the AI won't be able to land, thus isn't able to conquer that island, until it has marines.
*Ship hopping
While at sea, you can unload a ship on the same square where there is another ship and that ship can take over the load. This way you can move your units to any location in one turn. But it takes a lot of effort.
*ICS (Infinite City Sprawl)
Build a lot of cities very close next to each other. This way you simply have more cities which are in the beginning just as big as normal.

[DISALLOWED]:
>Scout resource denial
Place a scout on a square where there is a resource and in (future) enemy territory. As long as you have peace with them you can leave him there undisturbed and the other will never be able to build a road to it.
>Pop-Rushing
In despotism and communism it is possible to use cities purely for unit rush building. Workers can be added to such a city and then the city can then use them to rush build units. This is disallowed, so do not create these kind of cities. Pop rushing one or two regular citizens to finish a building or to build a unit is within the rules and the spirit of the game. What is against the rules is joining workers to cities for the purpose of pop rushing.
>Worker dogpile
Let all your workers join a city with a hospital and continue to build workers and let them join that city. There's no size limit so your city will become huge and you loose only one population per turn. All the workers become specialists and add to your score.
>Gold mine
You can make cities give wealth and production at the same time. First set the cities to produce wealth. At the beginning of the next turn when another city is done building something else you can go to other cities with the arrows above and change the production of the cities that produce wealth to e.g. some unit. That will get production as well.

Although the last four are disallowed for their GotM, the only one I think concerns us is the Gold Mine, which is what alexman has already covered. Also note ship chains aren't disallowed here...

I think we can kill three birds with one stone. Since the map is hidden during the production phase anyway, if everyone clicks 'OK' on the pop-ups for new units and civil disorder, the F1 and arrow key exploits will be bypassed, along with the map blackout bug. [edit: You must simply go back through your cities to make any changes after the production phase is finished.]

[Jon Shafer]

Some of those rules are questionable, especially the adding Workers in order to pop rush units (you do get mad unhappiness from this), Palace jump, ROP-rape and ICS ones. I do like the rule banning the blocking of coasts with units to prevent landings before Marines though.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
rommel, who will be setting up the games? one group for the other or is there a neutral (not playing) person who'll do it or is it up to the RMG?

RMG -> Random Map Generator?

I'm not playing, but I'll have the first player in each group start the game with an administrative password I send to them.

Alternatively, I could start the games and skip everyone's first turn. I just don't want to send out the games as mods like we did in the first tournament, as I believe there is no way to avoid messing up the trait-influenced starting positions.

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

RMG -> Random Map Generator?

I'm not playing, but I'll have the first player in each group start the game with an administrative password I send to them.

Alternatively, I could start the games and skip everyone's first turn. I just don't want to send out the games as mods like we did in the first tournament, as I believe there is no way to avoid messing up the trait-influenced starting positions.

I like your 2nd option here

sorry, I know it means some work for you

but this is a tournament

so it goes with the terrirtory

[Jon Shafer]

Yes, additionally if you can make sure the maps are fair for each player it would be nice.

There's nothing more upsetting than losing because you got stuck between 2 other civs with 1/3 of each of their land in the middle of a swamp.

[Rommel2D]

I know this thread isn't being woven very tightly, but in a day or two when I have more time and the exploits have been discussed more, I'll start a new one with the relavant information copied over...

Originally posted by Trip
If I advance to the next round, I want to play against opponents who has earned their spots by being good Civ players, not because they and a friend triggered their GAs on each other at an opportune moment to take out a 3rd player, or because someone knew how to chain ships together to land an invasion force 30 tiles from where he should have been able to.

Is that too much to ask?

It is beyond the scope of Civ3 PBEM to enforce most of these exploit-related rules. The only hard-and-fast rules I'm posting for all games are there to assure the games move along relatively fast and four victors are mustered up for the final showdown.

Civ, being loosely based on the real world, has its gray areas of uncertainty, for better or worse. If someone uses questionable means to reach the finals, they will be less prepared to deal with you in the next round when they must play with your explicit limitations. Believe me, no one will be forcing an agreement on you to allow use of a pet exploit to their advantage in the championship game, even if someone here were the type to try, which I doubt.

The maps will not be judged by me. The single restart option is meant to greatly reduce the chances of a demoralizing starting position, but overall balance is ultimately in the merciless 'hands' of the Great RMG. Ya pays yer entry fee, ya takes yer chances...

[Jon Shafer]

And PBEM is also beyond the scope of Civ 3.

When it was designed there was never any thought given to mutual usage of Workers, or collaborative GA triggering, or sharing wonders, or a number of other things. It was hard enough simply getting the game to work in MP, and no time was given to addressing these problems. But here they are.

And when the cat's away the mice will play.

There's a huge repertoire of exploits that can be implimented. I or anyone else could complete assure victory before anyone builds their 2nd city. Are you not even going to place limitations on reloading? Playing another person's turn? Some people feel they have no moral obligation to play fair if there are no rules.

If play delves into that kind of territory then this "tournament" will be a joke.

[Conqueror]

Why not just agree on using the MZO rules Trip pasted here, they seem reasonable.

There is also a good post about PBEM etiquette on the PBEM Info Thread. It includes the same exploit list too.

I think most of us PBEM players agree on both of those anyway, so they could be just 'agreed on' without the need of any enforcement.

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
I'm not playing, but I'll have the first player in each group start the game with an administrative password I send to them.

Alternatively, I could start the games and skip everyone's first turn. I just don't want to send out the games as mods like we did in the first tournament, as I believe there is no way to avoid messing up the trait-influenced starting positions.

The 2nd option seems better as stated already by Paddy, none of the players need to know admin pass.

[sabrewolf]

i second these opinions.
rommel, if you're prepared to set up the games for all teams, then we can get scrap the "request 1 restart"-rule.

it would be up to you decide if the starting positions, terrain, civs, etc. are fair.
or you could create new maps (yes, RMG meant random map generator ) and start in like that... but don't ask me how, all i know is that the conquests-scenarios work in MP...

[Iron Jackson]

I agree with Paddy that the games should be started by Rommel. Makes it easier. It means that we get some delay until everyone has passed his password to Rommel but that´s worth it.

[alexman]

Some comments on the CFC list:

*Right of Passage Abuse

This applies only against the AI, and since there is no AI in the tournament, it's not relevant to us.

*Free Palace Jump

This is not nearly as powerful in C3C, because of the way the FP now works. In any event, I think the Palace jump is a valid Civ3 strategy, that requires you to think ahead, and usually involves a trade-off, as any improvements in your capital will be lost. I don't think it's necessary to disallow this.

*Island block

I don't like this rule either because it's difficult to define. Will we disallow stationing units on coastal mountains to prevent landings there too? What about just tiles adjacent to cities to prevent slow-movers and bombard units from attacking next turn? What about at a two-tile radius to prevent even fast-movers from reaching the city? Don't forget that you usually have to pay upkeep for all these extra units. The best way to deal with this issue is to give the amphibious ability to a couple of early weak units, but this is not an option since we are playing under stock rules.

*Ship hopping

Again, I don't see anything wrong with ship hopping. It requires planning, and invasions done this way are easy to detect and stop by human opponents. Build a navy of your own, attack a link, and the chain is broken.

*ICS (Infinite City Sprawl)

There is a trade-off involved with ICS. You sacrifice rank corruption for lower distance corruption. I don't think ICS is even considered an exploit in single-player games!

*Scout resource denial

This applies only against the AI. Not relevant here.

*Pop-Rushing

Yes, you can have a city with just one specialist, which never gets unhappiness. You join a worker and immediately pop-rush. I can accept this as an exploit, although I don't think it's too powerful. You just convert 20 food and 10 shields into 20 shields. Big deal!

*Worker dogpile

Unless we expect to see histographic victories, we don't care about score in the tournament, so this is not relevant.

*Gold mine

Yup, this is an exploit, covered in the MZO list.

I'm for the MZO list. It's well thought-out, and it requires no extra work on our part.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Trip
If I advance to the next round, I want to play against opponents who has earned their spots by being good Civ players, not because they and a friend triggered their GAs on each other at an opportune moment to take out a 3rd player, or because someone knew how to chain ships together to land an invasion force 30 tiles from where he should have been able to.

I know what you mean, and feel the same way. However, this is not technically "unfair" play; if one group of players allows friendly GA triggering in their game, they are all on equal footing.

Where the "unfairness" comes in is the level of meta-game cooperation. If Trip really likes alexman he's more likely to side with him to do the friendly GA trigger, giving them an unfair advantage relative to Paddy the Scot who is unpopular (just an example - sorry Paddy). I dealt with this specifically in my "PBEM Etiquette" thread.

Again, if all players within a certain game agree on the list of exploits, there's nothing "unfair" about their game compared to another group with a different list. But I agree that standardization is good, in anticipation of the final showdown game.


Dominae

[alexman]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
The maps will not be judged by me. The single restart option is meant to greatly reduce the chances of a demoralizing starting position, but overall balance is ultimately in the merciless 'hands' of the Great RMG. Ya pays yer entry fee, ya takes yer chances...

If we are going to have you to set up the games, I would much prefer to eliminate the single restart rule. Otherwise, for example, every Agricultural player not starting on a river will demand a restart, which makes the trait too powerful.

But if an administrator generates the map, makes a quick check for fairness, and doesn't assign starting locations to specific players, I think it should work fine.

Using the map generator without any editing at all (just generate another if it doesn't look fair) will remove the element of trying to read the map maker's mind, and even remove most of the blame from him!

[Dominae]

I can check the maps for you guys (no tinkering, I swear!).

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Trip
There's a huge repertoire of exploits that can be implimented. I or anyone else could complete assure victory before anyone builds their 2nd city. Are you not even going to place limitations on reloading? Playing another person's turn? Some people feel they have no moral obligation to play fair if there are no rules.

I'm not saying there are to be no rules concerning these exploits, I'm saying these should be agreed to by by each group of four before beginning the games. If we can get a consensus from all sixteen players here on what is and isn't an exploit, that'd be great, but I'm skeptical of this happening anytime soon. I feel it is more realistic to expect each group to come to this agreement on their own.

The first tournament went off with barely any mention of exploits, and I have yet to see anyone mentioning even the suspicion of foul play. The problem is that some of the games have lapsed into the weeks-per-turn pace and a final round seems unlikely without drastic intervention into these games' resolution. This is why my primary focus here is to assure the games proceed steadily.

Curbing cheating doesn't seem like a major concern at this point, although I'd certainly like to give the games as much integrity as possible. But your examples don't seem grounded in the realm of likeliness (is this a word?). If a player needs to be explicitly told that obvious cheats aren't allowed, they shouldn't be playing Civ3 PBEM, much less entering this tournament. Looking at the prelimary groupings posted above, which foursome would you suspect might agree "playing another's turn is Ok"?

[Jon Shafer]

Well, I have faith in my group at least.

Let's get started.

[smellymummy]

likeliness is indeed a word

and like trip posted.. let's get started!

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by alexman
If we are going to have you to set up the games, I would much prefer to eliminate the single restart rule. Otherwise, for example, every Agricultural player not starting on a river will demand a restart, which makes the trait too powerful.

A restart would also mean a randomly reassigned tribe, so it could not be used to assure a river start for agricultural tribes. Not to be argumentative- I simply haven't played Ag enough to have a feel for it- but are you saying you think that starting away from a river with the agricultural trait would make for a sub-par tribe? (So much so that it would be worth risking a landlocked jungle start with Portugal? ;-) BTW- I agree this option shouldn't be used for the championship game, where players will choose their own tribes.

I'd like to try the restart option because it keeps the randomness of generation pure- yet empowers the player to judge for themselves if a start is so far below average it is worth risking another. Having myself or Dominae fill this capacity means one of us will be making this judgement for everyone else. In a sense this would be more fair, but IMO it takes some of the fun away. Some of the players here have expressed a preference for playing random starts as given, it seems to me the single restart is a good compromise. If the consensus is to have human intervention though, I'd suggest Dominae take the task, having the experience to make better judgements.

Either way, i still need passwords from everyone. Sorry, I should've had everyone include them in the confirmation PMs. I need another PM from everyone with their passwords for the first round. Anything else I'm forgetting?

I have yet to receive confirmation that Soltz will be playing. Has anyone seen him post in other threads recently?

[Aqualung71]

I would go so far as to say that random tribes should be assigned even in the championship game, as long as the map and general start locations are. reviewed for fairness by an independent party. That way we find a player who is a great all-rounder, rather than someone who gets to pick the one civ he plays every week and knows every step of his first 50 moves before the game even starts. Just my opinion

Here is Soltz's last post - seems he's been away

[Rommel2D]

Well, I've included picking tribes for the championship as part of the tournament structure. We obviously don't want this to become an all out race to complete turns, but having the first player to finish their game get first choice of tribes seems like a minor incentive to play fast, but not enough of an advantage to put anyone else in a hole. Of course, this relies heavily on the first two points in Dom's ettiquette guide, namely playing to win and leaving baggage behind.

The way I see it, the first round makes sure we have four 'all-rounders', and the championship is where we see their best game- which includes knowing a few tribes very well...

[Flandrien]

I haven't had my word in the discussion yet.
Here is what I think :

- An exploit is an exploit for all games, no list of exploits for each seperate game.
- Maps should be reviewed for fairness before the game starts (by Dominae ?). That way a restart is not necessary.
- If we want to find an allround player, then yes tribes should be random. But then we would need more than just 1 first round game and 1 final game. (Something like 4 first round games and 1 final game.)

[Flandrien]

Hmm, a full tournament (everybody plays a game against all other players) would imply that everybody plays 5 games.


Game 1
ricketyclick
Paddy the Scot
aqua_lung
Masuro


Game 2
Iron Jackson
Conqueror
Flandrien
LzPrst


Game 3
Andydog
sabrewolf
Mickeyj
Moonbars


Game 4
alexman
Trip
smellymummy
Soltz


Game 5
ricketyclick
Iron Jackson
Andydog
alexman


Game 6
Paddy the Scot
Conqueror
sabrewolf
Trip


Game 7
aqua_lung
Flandrien
Mickeyj
smellymummy


Game 8
Masuro
LzPrst
Moonbars
Soltz


Game 9
Paddy the Scot
Iron Jackson
Moonbars
smellymummy


Game 10
aqua_lung
Iron Jackson
sabrewolf
Soltz


Game 11
Masuro
Iron Jackson
Mickeyj
Trip


Game 12
ricketyclick
Conqueror
Mickeyj
Soltz


Game 13
aqua_lung
Conqueror
Moonbars
alexman


Game 14
Masuro
Conqueror
Andydog
smellymummy


Game 15
ricketyclick
Flandrien
Moonbars
Trip


Game 16
Paddy the Scot
Flandrien
Andydog
Soltz


Game 17
Masuro
Flandrien
sabrewolf
alexman


Game 18
ricketyclick
LzPrst
sabrewolf
smellymummy


Game 19
Paddy the Scot
LzPrst
Mickeyj
alexman


Game 20
aqua_lung
LzPrst
Andydog
Trip

[Dominae]

Rommel2D, I was just offering my services as map-checker, seeing as I'm not playing. If you want to do it, please say so.


Dominae

[alexman]

Some random comments:

Flandrien, a full tournament for PBEM, like what you suggest, would probably finish just about when Civ VII comes out!

Dominae, Rommel2D is not playing either. I think one of you at least should play!

I like the idea of randomly assigned tribes. I didn't consider that this was how we would be playing when I posted against restarts.

But what about the luxury scarcity in C3C? Especially the lack of coal, can ruin games among humans. This is something we won't know in advance to request a restart, but a map-checker can easily make it fair for everyone.

[sabrewolf]

we could play all 5 games parallel

oh yeah... micromanaging 5 times as many units and cities in the later game

random tribes can be a big pain, but otoh no two people will fight for their favorite civ (be it mongols, americans, or other gamebreaking civs )