What's the deal with Cheaters? - Page 2

Dis · February 13, 2002, 22:47

of course this was in response to that god mode cheat code.

What use would you have for all of those things?

As for mods, they aren't cheating. I mod navy units all the time. Since it's obvious Firaxis knows nothing about the navy

. The ai gets access to these same features.

I have saved reloaded in the past. But it seems silly now. Especially since the game isn't that hard. I might be inclined to do that if the game was impossibly hard and I couldn't win any other way.

I will admit, I have cheated on games in the past to win them. Either by looking up walkthoughs (small cheat but still a cheat), or using cheat codes. Eventually I reach a point in the game I can go no further. It only makes good economical sense that I cheat

. Why pay good money for a game I cannot finish? But most games are easy enough I can win without cheating, but not all of them are that easy.

Thrawn05 · February 13, 2002, 22:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem
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!

AMEN!

The only changes I made were to the resources. I made it so none disappear (or reappear). Now many people might say that this is a big advantage to me, but it ISN'T! If I find out in the end that coal or Al are not on my turf, I have to either trade with someone who has it, or go for an all out war. Usually, its the latter, since they usually only have one source.

bahoo · February 14, 2002, 14:32

Bah, everyone's cheated.

You've all done the save/reload cheat when things go awry, or restarted a bunch because you started in a tundra with no rivers!

Willem · February 14, 2002, 14:44

What does restarting have to do with cheating?

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 14:46

It is a logical fallacy to project a limited sampling into a generalized truth. When you say "everybody", a single counter-example suffices to render your assertion false.

volcanohead · February 14, 2002, 14:48

But the question is, can you personally provide that counter-example?

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 15:35

You ask that of a man who hit a golf ball from a smoldering pile of ash? I play the game. If I win, I win. If I lose, I learn.

bahoo · February 14, 2002, 16:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian
You ask that of a man who hit a golf ball from a smoldering pile of ash? I play the game. If I win, I win. If I lose, I learn.

Cheating at golf and cheating at a computer game are two completely different things. You can justify cheating at a computer game because the computer cheats, a spearmen shouldn't be able to kill a tank, or any other myriad of reasons. But in golf, you're just cheating yourself because there is no one else to blame, it's just you and the ball.

I like how you completely avoid answering the question, but in the same motion suggest that you don't cheat using your strange smoldering golf ball analogy. Nice try, Lib, but we all know you're an obsessive reloader who keeps trying the same turn over and over till you get it right.

On an aside, how is it that you came to hit your ball onto a smoldering pile of ash?

Steve Clark · February 14, 2002, 16:20

That, Lib, is a signature.

jackshot · February 14, 2002, 16:36

One man's cheat is another's play balance.

And sorry Libertarian, but your point is not well taken. You can learn a lot cheating, you know. Don't assume everyone is as accustomed to just jumping in as you seem to be. With a cheat mode, I can cut the learning curve of a game in half, more if the game is unfamilar. I consider them almost required to learn a long game - so I can experience the endgame that would have been if not for my false starts. Learning something.

Point two is how you can use the cheat mode after you have learned the game to make the game run smoother or rougher as your heart desires. With Civ2, I used to play with the CM on all the time and I evolved rules, like retired units and supply lines (which affected only me), and I would smooth out the terrain a bit as I needed (which helped me). All this added up to a playable game with consistent scoring for comparision, at least on my computer. To call this cheating, I don't get it. I just call it home rules.

Point three is the obvious use for scenario creation and testing.

All this, and the argument on the other side always seem to boil down to a plea for manhood. WTF, you people. I get the the point about the golf ball in the ashes and your friend's honesty, but do you really want a world where one could never, under any circumstances or level of play (other than specifically spelled out in the rules) move a ball on a course? Because that's the analogy, right?

Ironikinit · February 14, 2002, 16:40

Something tells me bahoo's been lurking a while.

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 16:43

Quote:

That, Lib, is a signature.

I'm honored, Steve. Thank you.

Quote:

Cheating at golf and cheating at a computer game are two completely different things. You can justify cheating at a computer game because the computer cheats, a spearmen shouldn't be able to kill a tank, or any other myriad of reasons. But in golf, you're just cheating yourself because there is no one else to blame, it's just you and the ball.

Just cheating yourself? Forgive me, but I cannot fathom so low a self-esteem.

There is no reason that a man could not rationalize (what you call "justify") cheating at golf the same way. After all, a tree shouldn't grow right by the fairway, and they did the pin placements unfairly.

Quote:

I like how you completely avoid answering the question, but in the same motion suggest that you don't cheat using your strange smoldering golf ball analogy. Nice try, Lib, but we all know you're an obsessive reloader who keeps trying the same turn over and over till you get it right.

I reload only when it is time to resume play. I do not reload to alter the outcome of a turn. Quite honestly, if you do this, you miss out on an awful lot of interesting learning experiences.

Quote:

On an aside, how is it that you came to hit your ball onto a smoldering pile of ash?

That's just where it landed. It was my second shot on a par five at a fairly trashy course in South Carolina. They had actually burned some logs right beside the fairway the night before, and they were still smoldering when my ball landed in them. They weren't marked as GUR, so I hit the ball.

Quote:

WTF, you people. I get the the point about the golf ball in the ashes and your friend's honesty, but do you really want a world where one could never, under any circumstances or level of play (other than specifically spelled out in the rules) move a ball on a course?

I don't hold other men to my own standards, and I don't expect them to hold me to theirs. Do as you wish.

Salvor · February 14, 2002, 17:27

Jackshot, I think you are going to extremes, jumping to conclusions, and seeing ghosts where there really are none.

Read further up in the thread where there are discussions of "mods" versus "cheats". Not every rule change is a cheat. Modifying the game for learning, experimenting, or tweaking the game to suit your own tastes is not considered cheating by the community as a whole. Cheating generally involves some kind of misrepresentation, where you do it in a competition or to make someone (including yourself) believe that you have accomplished something that you haven't, like beating the game at Diety level.

I didn't see any pleas for manhood posted here. Nor did I see any expressed desire to eliminate anyone's ability to change the rules of the game as they see fit. If you want to cheat, go right ahead, it won't ruin my life. But if you misrepresent yourself or your achievements, don't expect me to have any respect for you. But just because I disapprove doesn't mean you can't do it. You don't need my permission to do anything. But you likewise can't force me or anyone else to be happy about your actions, or to refrain from expressing our opinions of people who misrepresent their accomplishments.

The analogy is not a world where nobody can ever move a golf ball on a course. The analogy is a world where some people (or at least one person) can choose not to move a golf ball if he so desires.

BTW Lib, I hope you weren't wearing soft spikes at the time, or you might never have been able to get them out.

facistdictator · February 14, 2002, 17:46

Hey Lib get a clue, everyone here knows you dont have wings on your back so chill out. That's the difference between me and you, I'm honest and your not. I dont judge people if they cheat, support abortion, or any other thing that is legal and under the law of the United States. That's why I love America, now if you and any other associates on this forum who agree with your almost communist ideology would like to save up enough money to buy a small island or nation and implement your sadistic laws so you can be the high pope and throw people who cheat on video games into concentration camps then thats fine, but please dont do it in the United States. LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME! IF YOUR NOT DOING ANYTHING ILLEGAL WHO CARES, AND I SAY MORE POWER TO YOU. IF A MAN WANTS TO CHEAT ON A VIDEO GAME HE BOUGHT WITH HIS MONEY, THEN BY GOD LET THE MAN CHEAT AND PISS ON WHAT YOU OR ANYBODY ELSE THINKS ABOUT IT!

Salvor · February 14, 2002, 18:07

Fascistdictator, are you one of the ones who can't figure out why the rest of the world thinks we're arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded?

I know you have every right to be just as arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded as you want, but when you do it so loudly, it causes problems for those of us who like to travel overseas without being ashamed of our countrymen and trying to disguise ourselves as Canadians.

Arrian · February 14, 2002, 18:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Salvor
Fascistdictator, are you one of the ones who can't figure out why the rest of the world thinks we're arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded?

I know you have every right to be just as arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded as you want, but when you do it so loudly, it causes problems for those of us who like to travel overseas without being ashamed of our countrymen and trying to disguise ourselves as Canadians.

It's tough working out just how to say "eh" [A] like a Canadian, but once you've got that down, it's a cinch.

FacistD - Your name is fitting. What are you, the forum nazi? And if you think that Libertarianism is related to Communism, you are terribly ignorant. Don't worry about it, though, go wave a flag, sing "God Bless America" a few times, and you'll feel fine.

-Arrian

Willem · February 14, 2002, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Salvor
Fascistdictator, are you one of the ones who can't figure out why the rest of the world thinks we're arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded?

I know you have every right to be just as arrogant, self-righteous, and narrow-minded as you want, but when you do it so loudly, it causes problems for those of us who like to travel overseas without being ashamed of our countrymen and trying to disguise ourselves as Canadians.

As a Canadian, I applaud your post. Many of your countrymen could learn much by your example.

PS. Sorry, countrymen/women. Arrogance has no gender bias.

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 18:47

[...facing Salvor... ...saluting...]

What an honor it is to post with people like you, Steve, Willem, Arrian, and others.

-----------------------------------------------

facistdictator:

Are you a DL for Ironikinit?

facistdictator · February 14, 2002, 18:56

Arrian well what about your name, are you the forum aryan? By the way I'm not the one judging those who dont do what I do. You guys are the ones mouthing off at everbody telling them that if you cheat your that, or this, or so on and so on. I just get so sick of you people telling others that their wrong if they dont agree with you. Again if people are not bothering you and obeying the law leave them alone and keep your commie a$$ opinions to yourself. By the way I'm not a fascist I just chose the name because I like that type of goverment in the game.

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 19:00

Quote:

By the way I'm not the one judging those who dont do what I do. You guys are the ones mouthing off at everbody telling them that if you cheat your that, or this, or so on and so on.

Did you miss this from me?

Quote:

I don't hold other men to my own standards, and I don't expect them to hold me to theirs. Do as you wish.

And this from Salvor?

Quote:

If you want to cheat, go right ahead, it won't ruin my life.

You gonna dig your hole little deeper or apologize?

Salvor · February 14, 2002, 19:01

So, FD, I suppose that means your answer to my question would be a "yes".

Arrian · February 14, 2002, 19:10

Facist -

Flavius Arrianus Xenophon was one of the more prominent figures in the Roman world of the 2nd century C.E. A native of Nicea (Iznik) in Bithynian Nicomedia (Izmit), he was a Greek Stoic philosopher and historian, who enjoyed Roman citizenship in the equestrian ranks. Arrian was a pupil of the famous Stoic philosopher Epictetus at Nicopolis and Arrian wrote up his lecture notes, or memorabilia. Perhaps while at Nicopolis he explored the surrounding countryside, for Arrian shows in his writings a firsthand familiarity with the regions of Ambracia and Amphilochia, as well as the sea route between Acarnania (south of Nicopolis) and the island of Leucas.

Later, he also visited Delphi (where he may have met Plutarch), when he was part of the advisory council for settling boundary disputes, which was headed by Avidius Nigrinus. During the emperor Trajan's (ruled 98-117 C.E.) Parthian campaign, Arrian may have served as an equestrian officer in Armenia (c. 114 C.E.). At some point he became part of the circle of the emperor Hadrian (ruled 117-138 C.E.), perhaps travelling with him in 121-122 C.E. and playing host when Hadrian wintered in Nicomedia in 123 C.E. What is certain is that Arrian enjoyed great favor under Hadrian. He may have been Proconsul in Baetica in 124 C.E., and perhaps was with the emperor on his visit to Africa in 128 C.E. (The noted Roman historian Anthony R. Birley, in his Hadrian. The Restless Emperor (London: Routledge, 1997), suggests that it was on this trip that Arrian may have gathered some of the ideas he would later incorporate into his book on Tactics, written in 136 C.E.)

Arrian was Consul in 129 C.E. (or perhaps 130 C.E.). He may again have been part of Hadrian's entourage during 129-130 C.E. As Governor of Cappadocia from 131/134-137 C.E., he kept in touch with Hadrian, displaying zeal in his governance and proving successful in handling a military emergency. When Pharasmanes stirred up the Alani people, Arrian quelled the trouble with a well-orchestrated show of Roman force (136 C.E.), about which he wrote in his Acies Contra Alanos (Order of Battle Against the Alani). Arrian enjoyed a long and successful career under Hadrian and his successor, Antoninus Pius (ruled 138-161 C.E.). Arrian's writing seems to have been done mainly during the 130s C.E. His most famous writing is his Anabasis, a history of Alexander the Great, written in Greek. A great admirer of the famous Greek writer Xenophon, Arrian imitated his style.

[FROM WWW.BARCA.FSNET.CO.UK]

I read Arrian's Life of Alexander in college and thoroughly enjoyed it. So, tell me, what do you think that has to do with the word "Aryan?" It's spelled differently for a reason

-Arrian

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 19:10

Quote:

So, FD, I suppose that means your answer to my question would be a "yes".

I'd say you're safe with that assumption. Welcome to the boards, Salvor!

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 19:13

Arrian:

A poster at SD uses Xenophon!

Arrian · February 14, 2002, 19:16

Um, help Lib, what's "SD" stand for?

-Arrian

Libertarian · February 14, 2002, 19:20

Straight Dope. Their board is down until Monday, but I think you'll enjoy some of Cecil's columns.

http://www.straightdope.com

August Borms · February 14, 2002, 19:21

Quote:

Originally posted by facistdictator
Arrian well what about your name, are you the forum aryan?

Do you have something against Iranians?

Are you a racist?

Willem · February 14, 2002, 20:22

Quote:

Originally posted by facistdictator
Arrian well what about your name, are you the forum aryan? By the way I'm not the one judging those who dont do what I do. You guys are the ones mouthing off at everbody telling them that if you cheat your that, or this, or so on and so on. I just get so sick of you people telling others that their wrong if they dont agree with you. Again if people are not bothering you and obeying the law leave them alone and keep your commie a$$ opinions to yourself. By the way I'm not a fascist I just chose the name because I like that type of goverment in the game.

Well, number 2 on my ignore list. facistdictator, if you want people to take you seriously, I'd suggest you get rid of that moniker at the bottom of your post. Frankly, I find it offensive. Bye. Don't let the door hit you on on the way out.

Arrian · February 14, 2002, 20:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Assur

Do you have something against Iranians?

Are you a racist?

Good point, Assur.

Thanks for the link, Lib, I'll check it out at some point.

-Arrian

facistdictator · February 14, 2002, 21:33

Thanx for the history lesson Arrian, did you copy it word for word or did you make some of it up yourself.

Assur to answer your question no I dont. I'm on this forum in the name of freedom and not trying to throw my personal views about cheating to everyone else. By the way what on gods earth made you assume i had something against you. I was not even replying to you. So I will ask you the same do you have something against Americans?

Willem I may find the name Willem offensive so I'll impose my will upon you please remove it. Give me a break. Go hug a tree for me.