What's the deal with Cheaters?

Dis · February 13, 2002, 02:44

I don't get it. This game isn't very hard. True I haven't beaten Diety, but that is because I stopped playing. What's the point of beating Diety if you cheat.

I can't believe people went through those steps to find those cheat codes.

Do people really spend all day long doing weird things to find cheats?

Enlighten me into the mind of a cheater. I will be most appreciative.

Libertarian · February 13, 2002, 02:48

There was a thread here about that last year. Basically, their rationale was that so long as they are cheating no one but themselves, it isn't really cheating. It might have sufficed to have stopped with those insults to their own self-interest and esteem, but unfortunately they took it a step further and dismissed those who refuse to cheat as holier-than-thou hypocrites.

Dis · February 13, 2002, 03:39

yeah I may have skimmed over that thread.

I'm thinking about doing something crazy. I'm thinking about playing civ3.

Arrian · February 13, 2002, 11:30

I don't understand the desire for cheat codes, either, unless it's for scenario making/testing. I'm not about to lecture anyone for cheating in a single player game, but I personally don't get it. *Shrug* To each their own, I guess. There are people who think Civ III is very hard, by the way, mostly because they don't spend the time to learn how the game works. I know such a person at work, who keeps getting thrashed on chieftain. He doesn't know basic things like the need for aqueducts to go past size 6, that marketplaces make extra people happy if you have 3+ luxuries, etc. His response to RTFM? Bah! I just wanna jump in and play... why's this game so hard?

-Arrian

Heliodorus · February 13, 2002, 12:02

I cheat on the final boss level of any FPS game I ever play. That's because those final boss levels are usually insanely boring, and all I want to get to at that point is the final cutscene. One of my greatest disappointments was not being able to enter a god mode cheat for System Shock 2, because I didn't have the patience to try to fight "the perfect fight" to get to the final cutscene.

I cheated on Age of Wonders after the first try, because I just wanted to exploit the spell system to see what it could do.

I didn't cheat on any Civ game unless it was to do something outlandish for humor (flying triremes in Civ1 being my favorite memory along that vein).

What's interesting to me is the group of people who, in playing Civ3 and not attaining their personally desired result, blame the game... This reveals something important about temperment, methinks. I should'nt be surprised (I suppose I'm more alarmed than surprised) it's a mad culture.

Harovan · February 13, 2002, 12:06

I also refuse to change the game's rules, but besides the "make game easier" type cheaters, I have seen 2 interesting other types:

- Some try to make the game more fun by editing the rules. For example, they add early units without nationality, to deal with the wandering settlers. The thing is, that's not really a cheat, because (as they report) the AI uses them as well, for example to pillage your improvements.

- Some try to make the game even harder, e.g. by removing the combat bonus with barbarians.

Seghillian · February 13, 2002, 13:49

Anyone who is down on cheats or down on those who won't cheat is showing a remarkable degree of intolerance.

I've enjoyed playing CIV, CIVII, CIVIII and SMAC at "Iron Man" settings where available AND using lots of save/reload and cheat modes. It's my game and I do what I like with it. "Cheating" does not exist in a SP game, only in multiplayer or an event like GOTM. I recall a favourite technique in CIV II was to give my stone age tribe a couple of stealth bombers at the start just for, well, fun really.

(And I can tell you that they took the occasional point of damage when bombing warriors - the spearmen vs tank debate is not new).

CIV in all it's guises is a great game. Play it without cheating and try and outdo previous performances or join competitions like GOTM. Or use every trick in the book, and tinker, just to find out more about the game. Fancying a quick game the other day I used the editor to make my "Immortals" just that with an ADM of 10/10/3. It was fun. I didn't brag to anyone about my score so there's no harm done. If that doesn't apeal to you - cool - you play it your way. Different strokes

Live and let live.

Thrawn05 · February 13, 2002, 14:11

I play the game and try beat the game at the highst difficulty before I might cheat. I don't really. For FPS games, I might use some sort of cheat that stops the AI from moving and reacting to you, and get to the end of the level, save it, turn the AI back on, and play the level backwards. I used to do this with JK, its fun.

Steve Clark · February 13, 2002, 15:06

I don't get it either, :shrug: . That's why I said that if you wanted (or demanded by one poster) to have known starting locations for each of the civs, that would be cheating. It's fine if someone wants to play a non-scenario game that way, but why would you demand Firaxis to build in a cheat option (again, outside of the editor)?

Adagio · February 13, 2002, 15:09

I just don't see why you are complaining about other people cheating in SP games. If they want to cheat, just let them cheat, it's not like they're harming you in some way.

Personally I never cheat in strategy games, last time I did was in Civ1 I think (Come on, I was about 10-12 years old and just wanted to win, I hated to lose

).

Ok, somebody might call this cheating to edit the game rules, but what I have changed in Civ3 is mostly best for the AI: I made all ships sail longer per turn, and I'm usually late when taking my first trip over the ocean so it gives a great advantage for the AI. Some wonders has more culture, but most of those wonders is of a very low priority for me.

The only games I cheat in is in FPS games. The reason is that I only like such games for a short amount of time, and when I get startet in a game I also want to finnish it.

Adagio · February 13, 2002, 15:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
I don't get it either, :shrug: . That's why I said that if you wanted (or demanded by one poster) to have known starting locations for each of the civs, that would be cheating.

I both agree and disagree. Ofcause it will help the player alot if he knows exactly where the enemies are starting, but on the other hand, it will be pretty boring to be playing the Americans in South Africa and Germany is starting in Japan.

To have known starting locations for all civs could be a good thing for e.g. tournaments, like if the holder of the tournament want to make sure that the player first contacts a very war-like civ to make the game more difficult. This means only the creator of the map knows where who is hiding and therefore the players don't know where they are.

Dis · February 13, 2002, 15:27

no to mention when England starts in the middle of asia

. their man o wars are quite useless.

Salvor · February 13, 2002, 15:34

IMHO, there's a big difference between cheating and modding. Most of what I've heard described on this thread (like flying triremes) falls under the category of modding. There's no moral or ethical dilemma regarding modding. It's not done to boast, or pretend you're better at something, it's just a way to add fun and extend the playable lifespan of a game. Modding is good.

Cheating, from a moral and ethical standpoint, is bad. Pretending you're better than you really are, boasting to your "friends" that you've accomplished something you haven't, or at its worst, trying to gain an unfair advantage in a tournament or GOTM is cheating.

If someone wants to cheat in a SP game, I won't try to stop them, and I couldn't care less what they do when they're alone "behind closed doors" so to speak. But if someone asks me what I think of them, I won't lie, and if they do ask, they have no legitimate basis to criticize me for telling the truth.

Libertarian · February 13, 2002, 15:41

I once hit a golf ball that rested on a smoldering pile of ash because it wasn't marked as ground under repair.

Salvor · February 13, 2002, 15:47

What kind of club did you use? It would seem to me that an ash pile wouldn't be much differnt from a bunker. You're not going to get much compression, so you shouldn't strike directly at the ball. Instead, you should scoop the ash out from under it much as you would the sand in a bunker.

But also would the heat from the ash change the aerodynamics enough to alter the flight? Or would the air turbulence from the temperature difference negate any benefit gained?

But how does this relate to the topic at hand? I think I know. If you hit a ball onto an ash pile that wasn't marked as ground under repair, then it's in bounds and you can hit it. Not cheating.

But if you hit a ball behind a tree so that you have no clear shot, and decide to burn the tree down to get it out of your way, and this is where the ash pile came from in the first place, then I'd say you need therapy.

Maybe you should build that hospital after all.

Libertarian · February 13, 2002, 15:51

I used a five iron. The aerodynamics of the ball were indeed altered, as half its casing had burned away. It relates to the topic at hand because my playing partner, who routinely cheated, derided me for not dropping a new ball nearby and playing on without a stroke penalty. Naturally, I would never play him for money, since I couldn't guarantee keeping my eye on him the entire time.

In my opinion, a man who cheats himself cheats the most important person in the world.

Willem · February 13, 2002, 16:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Salvor
IMHO, there's a big difference between cheating and modding. Most of what I've heard described on this thread (like flying triremes) falls under the category of modding. There's no moral or ethical dilemma regarding modding. It's not done to boast, or pretend you're better at something, it's just a way to add fun and extend the playable lifespan of a game. Modding is good.

I agree. A lot of people feel that since I'm making changes in the editor that I do so in order to make it easier to win. Frankly I could care less about my final score, that's not my motivation at all. I have an empire to run damn it! In many ways, I've actually made it harder for myself. Whenever I mod, I do so with a challenge in mind. I don't want the AI to be a push over, I want it to make me work for my victory.

But I don't necessarily agree with the game designers ideas, especially in a game like Civ. So I change the rules to fit with my sense of history, of running an empire, and the role of a particular unit etc. Plus the designers idea of fun might be my idea of annoying, i.e Settler Diarrhoea, so by modding I get more enjoyment out of the game.

If I wanted to cheat, I'd just give my Explorer a hidden nationality, and he could sabotage all my opponent's resources with impunity. But I hold back since that would make it to easy. BTW doing that means the AI will never attack the Explorer, even if you are at war. He can wander anywhere at will and pillage everything. I could strip the AI's land clean, and it would never lift a finger against the unit.

Steve Clark · February 13, 2002, 16:45

Than that would be House Rules or Challenges. Seems like there are different level of 'changing'...

Cheating (like reloading or give yourself 1000000 in gold)
House Rules (like only build 12 cities)
Modding (like creating a new government for the regular game)
Scenario-building (creating a new game where everything could be customized)

godinex · February 13, 2002, 17:00

Viva le cheaters!

Harovan · February 13, 2002, 17:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian
In my opinion, a man who cheats himself cheats the most important person in the world.

Isn't to count yourself the most important person in the world the definition of an egoist?

Libertarian · February 13, 2002, 17:26

I suppose it will suffice as a lay definition. Your point is...?

Harovan · February 13, 2002, 18:09

Nothing offensive, just that being an egoist has some negative touch here. That is why I wonder why you admit it so freely. May be different across the ocean.

Salvor · February 13, 2002, 18:18

Not to split hairs, and I have absolutely no intention of putting words in Lib's mouth, but when I read that the impression I got was one of self-respect, not egoism.

If you have so little respect for yourself that you can cheat yourself and feel proud of it, then what does that say about the way you are likely to treat others?

Harovan · February 13, 2002, 18:30

Explanation accepted. By the way, I don't cheat.

Salvor · February 13, 2002, 18:32

Sorry if I sounded accusatory. I meant "you" in a general sense, not any single person in particular.

August Borms · February 13, 2002, 18:39

I love cheating, it makes things less annoying and harder for me.

Captain · February 13, 2002, 19:48

There are only two reasons I ever use a cheat mode or some cheat code.

1) when I'm sure I'm going to win and I just don't want to bother with the tedium of mop-up (mostly in Starcraft when I didn't want to crawl through their huge empty base destroying stuff). In Civ games they didn't really have this particular code and you'd still have to play your turns out so I just retired at that point. I'd only call this cheating if there was some chance of losing - otherwise I'd just call this "forcing closure" on what's already been decided.

2) just for fun to see what would happen if I did something that ordinarily wouldn't happen (like testing bombers against spearmen - though I hear that's not uncommon in Civ 3

). I don't really consider this cheating though since it's just goofing off.

FNBrown · February 13, 2002, 20:37

As stated earlier, Mods aren't cheats...

I've added a few things like upgrades for otherwise obsolete units and so forth through the editor, just so I don't have a bunch of swordsmen lurking around in the 20th century.

Of course, the AI can use this as well. I added an attack and defense value to the scout unit so that mine didn't get whacked so often by barbarians, and had the English AI use them as a very mobile early attack unit against me. I actually got a kick out of that...

steelehc · February 13, 2002, 21:40

Ever play SimCity without cheating? It's really freaking hard. Try to make a city that borders on real life. Without cheating. Impossible, unless your city is Bum****, ZZ. The same thing holds in Civ, although to a much lesser extent. Sometimes its fun to try to re-create an actual civilization, country, nation, state, whatever. It is very hard to do that, and I don't want a challenge, I want to rule the USSR, or France, or whatever. I "cheat" when I do things like this. I think that is perfectly acceptable.

Steele

Encomium · February 13, 2002, 22:21

Civ II had a Cheat Mode.

I used it for many reasons besides "Cheating".

I could quickly check to be sure the terrain at 4,000 BC was fair and I was not stuck on some tundra.

I could replay scenarios and switch sides to see how much better I could do as the other civ.

I could run a game several thousand years, check the situation, and then resume play near the Medieval Age.

I could play out a tedius game that seemed to go nowhere.

I could see how well the AI could manage a situation/invasion I was planning.

There were lots of things I could do in Civ II - but not in Civ III.

I can't even make scenarios in Civ III.

BTW, improving Firaxis' crummy mod is not "cheating" since the values apply to all.