Tournament Rules Clarifications

[Tau Ceti]

The wording of some of the tournament rules was a bit confusing, and some others were slightly out of date and did not cover all exploits. So I have done a revision; the set can, as always, be found in PBEM Tournament Rules and Results, and the changes are in italics. Please take a look, and let me know if there is something I have missed.

[Tau Ceti]

^

[Flubber]

HI Tau and others

There are 2 matters that IMHO should be added to the rules

1. It should not be permitted to "Demand Withdrawal" of a human faction as it is the AI that determines whether you go to vendetta or have your armies whisked back to your nearest base

2. Players should not use the F4 screen of an infiltrated faction to mess with their specialists ( this one is pretty self evident)

I thought I saw number 1 discussed but it does not appear in the rules. perhaps there was a consensus against including it. Number 2 is a cheat through and through and it should go without saying.


I have copied the most recent set of rules here for ease of reference.


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




PBEM specific rules/restrictions on exploiting bugs (latest changes in italics):
Multiple reloading of the game to try for different effects is forbidden. If a reload is necessary because of a game crash etc., an explanation should be posted to the turn administration thread.

Multiple drops or orbital insertions using the right-click menu is forbidden. So is airdropping from outside a base/airbase, or after having moved (except on a magtube) using the same method. Using the 'i' key when you want an airdrop means you will automatically comply with these restrictions.

Inserting Stockpile Energy into the build queue after a military unit is forbidden.

If a player employs a tactic that causes a state of vendetta, they are not allowed to "accept" a pending diplomatic agreement with that faction in the same turn, causing a change in diplomatic status or the transfer of energy or knowledge.

If an aggressive probe action (anything except infiltration) is used on a faction you have a treaty or pact with, you must select 'Declare Vendetta' in the dialog box that appears afterwards, and notify the victim of your transgression, unless you have received permission in advance. No notification is required in other cases.

Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn only. However, supply crawlers upgraded in this fashion can still be used to advance Secret Projects in the same turn.

Tournament map: Communications between factions is allowed from the start. No restrictions.

Other maps: Communications only allowed between factions that have obtained each others' commlink frequencies in-game.

Social engineering choice limited to one switch per line per turn. (no flip-flop within turn!)

Psi units cannot be assigned multiple point patrol routes (avoid instant demon boil bug!)

Whenever the planetary council is called, the caller (or the first player to vote if the AI calls it) should post a notification to the thread, including vote totals (if applicable) and who has already voted for what. The other players should post how they vote.

Each game is initiated by a CMN who is not participating in that particular game. The CMN assigns a unique password to each player, emails it to them and sends out the first turn to the first player. If a player is away/offline/unable to play for over 48 hours, he/she must notify the CMN and the other players of the game about this and request the game to be postponed for a fixed time period. Otherwise, if a player does not respond to the game turn within 48 hours (without prior notification and postponing of the game), then the CMN will enter the game in place of the player, and at the option of the other players, either obliterate all bases and disband all units or turn the faction over to the AI. Alternatively, a replacement player may be found. If more players drop out similarly, then the last player is automatically declared to be the winner of the game.

No base trading with the AI. Extortion is allowed.

[Googlie]

Originally posted by Flubber

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

If a player is away/offline/unable to play for over 48 hours, he/she must notify the CMN ................ and the CMN will enter the game................. and turn the faction over to the AI.

How exactly does one do that?

G.

[big_canuk]

Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn only. However, supply crawlers upgraded in this fashion can still be used to advance Secret Projects in the same turn.

Does this mean crawlers can be upgraded and then *moved* to a SP base for cashing, or only that the DW can be used to upgrade crawlers already in the base? This would be the same as upgrading individually, and then selecting the upgraded crawler and pressing "O".

I can agree with the latter, but the former would not be appropriate, IMHO.

Allowing DW upgrades followed by movement, would allow a whole new field of specialty crawlers, for specific SP use.

Btw, I agree with Flubber's two suggestions, even the demand withdrawl one.

bc

[John Paul Jones]

Originally posted by Flubber

If a player is away/offline/unable to play for over 48 hours, he/she must notify the CMN ................ and the CMN will enter the game................. and turn the faction over to the AI.

Originally posted by Googlie

How exactly does one do that?

G.

I know of at least one quick & dirty way to do this:
The CMN can load the player's turn, Resign , save the game, reload the game , end the turn, save again and pass on the turn to the next player.

There is a slight problem with this though, Quantaga has told me it skips a year in the game.

Decker.

[John Paul Jones]

...and while I'm here, a clarification is need for the patrol route bug: This applies to ALL units - not just native units

[Tau Ceti]

Flubber: You have a good memory! It was discussed earlier - in late 2000, actually. There was a very long discussion, which ended in the presentation of three different alternatives for a rule. The intention was that a short summary should be written by the most vocal proponents of the different alternatives, including their analysis of the pros of their own and the cons of the other alternatives, and then a vote would be held. (I too was involved in the discussion and did not want to write it myself, to insure impartiality.)

Unfortunately, only one of the summaries was ever produced in its final form. One other was written, but in a rather different style, and a requested rewrite never appeared. The third summary was never written at all. Before too long, the entire process ran out of steam, and the vote was never held. Since then, the point has only been brought up once before now, so not having an official rule has not been much of a problem.

I will see if I can dig up the original thread for reference for those who would be interested.

Your point 2 is, as you say, rather obvious, going into the same category as opening someone else's commlinks and reports from their password screen. I can add it if you all think it is necessary, but there are quite a lot of these annoying interface bugs and making a comprehensive list of all of them could be tough. Common sense really should be a good guideline.

Googlie: JPJ outlined the procedure nicely. The problem is that it actually skips all the remaining players in the turn sequence (basically, their turn never happens; no production, no income, no nothing), so it only works properly if the retiree is the last player.

big_canuk: OK, I will add one further clarification to the rule: "provided they were moved to their final location before the upgrade." (This is basically already included in the rule, with the reasonable interpretation that "at end of turn" means after all movement, but could do with further clarification.)

I agree that you should not be allowed to upgrade a crawler to, say, drop or antigrav, then use its enhanced movement to get it somewhere it could not have got otherwise. However, it is my opinion that workshop-upgraded crawlers should be allowed to be used towards SPs in the same turn, as I think this is the most consistent approach.

Basically, the effect of a normal upgrade is to consume all of a unit's movement points. For military units, this removes all utility for that turn, as there is nothing they can do with no movement points (except disband/self-destruct). However, crawlers can do work with no movement points remaining; they can be reactivated and used to grab resources or advance SPs/prototypes (as I assume everybody knows and exploits). So since this ability is unaffected by a lack of movement points, and we already allow military units to be upgraded via the workshop even after movement, it seems reasonable that you should also be allowed to move a crawler, then upgrade it and use it right away.

John Paul Jones: Thanks for the info. I never use patrol routes, so I had no idea!

[Tau Ceti]

Well, the old thread appears to be gone. There are only 240 threads in this forum, and the oldest one is from Sep 31 last year.

[Flubber]

Tau

On obvious cheats, you are right. If someone is going to do something that is so OBVIOUSLY a cheat, adding it to the rules will change nothing.

Now . . . the demand withdrawal with an AI response is (to me) just like bribery in the council, in that an AI can respond differently than the human might wish with game changing consequences.

Consider if I am treatied with another player but want to start a war with him. I don't know any in-game way to declare that war except for attacking the other player unless I can find an AI that is talking to me that asks me to declare war on that other player.

The other player is cagy and knows of my intent and draws all his units back inside his boundaries and hits "demand withdrawal" every turn. My invasion force on his lands is bounced half a world away and I am unable to even start the war as now I have nothing in position to attack. Now, all I can do is land a unit and attack on the same turn to get into vendetta. . . . . all because it is up to a stupid AI as to what to do. Literally dozens of units could be relocated at the decision of the AI.

Personally I see no benefit of this feature.


--- and while this does come up a lot, we did have it arise in a (non-tourney) game where the player doing it insisted it was ok while the other felt it was cheating--

[John Paul Jones]

Not a solution: but you could always use this 'feature' against the player who abuses it by doing the same thing yourself - repeatedly, to invoke a state of vendetta (if repeated action doesn't work, flip-flopping the SE settings to lower the other AI's regard to you might help).

[Tau Ceti]

Flubber: Those are valid objections and were therefore addressed in the options we arrived at back then. Just a quick overview, from least to most restrictive:

1. You must be able to specify the location and type of an enemy unit in your territory before demanding withdrawal. A player may make a declaration of vendetta on the thread and via email to prevent its use.

2. You must specify the location and type of an enemy unit, and the direction you want them to withdraw in. The other player, on his turn, can follow your orders; declare vendetta as above; or ignore you. Only in the last case may you demand withdrawal via the commlinks.

3. You can never demand withdrawal under any circumstances.

Personally I dislike 3 because it removes all diplomatic difference between a truce and a treaty, making treaties simply about trade. Treaties are supposed to be an agreement to respect the other faction's borders, and there should be some mechanism to enforce this. If 3 is chosen, the only option for the player whose territory is invaded is to attack the other's units, which gives the wrong player a reputation hit and activates the wrong pacts. This option gives all the advantages to the attacker, as the defender gets all the risks (of inaction) and costs (of action).

Option 2, IMO, strikes the best balance; the only downside is that it is somewhat complex.

[Flubber]

I like 2 as well. While the most complex it does give the attacker options and allows them the possibility of suprise attack by withdrawing the unit that has been located but continuing to position others. A diligent defender can avoid the reputation hit and still maintain their territory.

It also allows the attacker to decide their relations and mimics the way it should work.

" Excuse me yang but I have spotted a rover at square 23,46-- That is our territory, please leave at once."

" No "
" Then it must be war"


My only wish is that the game engine was a little more sophisticated so that attcking someone in your own lands did not hit on your reputation. This was never a problem in SP as one could always goad the AI into declaring the war but in MP it seems that another player can march units up to your capitol and hitting at them is still your "fault" in diplo game terms.