Cheating in PBEMs

[techumseh]

Some points that have been made earlier are being ignored. The problem in the Mongols case is that not enough was done to contact the person involved before going to the boards. If contact had been made, I'm sure it would have been cleared up, and the charge of cheating never would have been made.

Auditing is the way to go, IMHO. If the PBEM game is identified as subject to audit before people sign on, then I think they'll have greater confidence in the game. I'm talking about random spot checks, perhaps no more than once in each game.

I think we should lay out some principles around this. Here are my suggestions.

1. The PBEM game belongs to the people playing it. So no one should be doing audits of any game without being asked to by the organizer of the game or by a player who suspects cheating is going on. Penalties for cheating should be laid out in advance and the final decision rests with the players of the game.

2. Games subject to audit should be identified at the begining. IMHO, these games will be considered as the most desirable to join.

3. Anyone suspected of cheating has a right to be contacted privately and to respond to any evidence before any other players are informed of the cheating allegation. The onus is on the person doing the audit to make the contact.

If we adopt something like this, then we can establish at least some games where cheating is very unlikely, and set a standard for the community.

[techumseh]

Originally posted by St Leo
I am going to let you guys elect an extra-dedicated moderator for fun stuff like IP checks. Tentatively, the candidates will be Darius871, Techumseh, Case, and FMK. Please inform me of other deserving regulars before I create the poll.

I think you'd better spell out what you mean in more detail.

[Darius871]

But an auditing system is already in place, and is possible for any game. If you suspect someone, there are people you can go to to get the files checked, they will contact the person if they are caught, and that's that.

If you look at the links on the list this method has worked very well and has caught half a dozen cheaters at CFC. All we need over here is a few people willing to do checks over here, and that seems sufficient to me.

[Darius871]

Also, another reason for not having some sort of citizen's militia checking files is that this would require telling a lot of people how to remove passwords for them to do their checks. You have to admit it's dangerous to proliferate that power.

[Choke]

I vote for FMK as mod.

[Case]

I'd be happy to serve as a special PBEM mod, but given the numbers of games that I, and all the other canditates are in, this job would require more then one individual IMO.

-----------

FMK: I thought that you were doing that in TSFE.

[Case]

BTW, I agree fully with Tech's proposals

[The ANZAC]

I agree with Tec that there should be some system setup and that the cheater should be informed beforehand, but once it is determined, they should go into the Hall of Shame

Also, it might logistically be a problem to implement this on a wider scale. Also I don't think Apolyton has had as much of a cheating as has say CFC, so organizing "PBEM Sheriffs" might be a little drastic.

[klesh]

Originally posted by The ANZAC
so organizing "PBEM Sheriffs" might be a little drastic.

I just liked the sound of it and the imagery it conjured up...



Case, did/do you have a problem with that style of play? Let me take a moment to explain myself. For everyone's refgerence, we are talking about this thread right here.

Now what I mean is that for instance the attack on Warsaw... I had attacked in the south and advanced fairly deeply. Looking at the map and knowing my force composition, I knew where my attack was going to stall out. When it did, I began testing the waters around Warsaw as I had been adding troops to Brest-Litovsk since the strart of the game. First try I couldnt crack the city, I attacked with perhaps 10 troops. I am not going to just take a loss liek that, so I restart and leave the city alone. Next turn repeat, and so forth. Maybe 4 turns down the road I am able to break into the city. I am using the same force the whole time, just not sending them to the slaughter.

I consider that more reconnaisance thn anything else. In the thread you can read me saying recon this and that and saying this such as "we think they are moving forces from here to there". This is a result of noticing during my test runs that units from Warsaw were leaving most likely to build up a defense line against my soputhern attack. It all worked out nicely as the front was so broad that I think I had you dashing from one side to the other.

If this is considered cheating then I suppose I am guilty. My performance in that game might be suspicious to those getting restless about cheating, so I offer my password to anyone who cares to review my saves. I'd be happy to explain what I did to get where I am.

I'm not calling you out at all Nick, I just want to be sure that you dont think I was shady in my play. I want to be a friendly player as much as everyone else here.

-Rob.

[MagyarCrusader]

Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
Well I do that latter all the time. I always take my PBEM turns 4 or 5 times. I never considered that cheating because trhe units there are just the units there, there is no fooling around with them.

When playing civ against humans, it is gravely important that you maximize your results. You dont have the leniancy that playing against a dumb AI affords. So when I unleash an attack of 30 units onto an enemy's border, I will attampt that attack a few times to see how far I can get it.

Especially for scenarios that have wildy alternate unit stats (tsfe comes to mind) you rarely now how attacks will turn out. If I attack a city with a T-34 a plane might defend, but if I go with an infantry I might get to take out that evber important bunker unit.

If playing your turn a few times is cheating, them put me on the 'blacklist'

-FMK.

Yeah, thats why I asked the question. I've done the same thing before myself, its just until know I never even considered that it might be cheating. I do it pretty much turn I play single player, but I don't do it nearly as much in multiplayer games because its a pain in the ass to reload the save.

[Darius871]

I think Kobayashi put it best:

I don't see what the discussion is about.

You are allowed to load up a game, play as yourself and save the game when your turn is over. If you do ANYTHING else, it is cheating.

[conmcb25]

I think Kobayashi put it best:

quote:

I don't see what the discussion is about.

You are allowed to load up a game, play as yourself and save the game when your turn is over. If you do ANYTHING else, it is cheating.

I agree with this, anything else is cheating maybe Im being to conservative here, but then it is only a game. I had assumed everyone else was doing this as well, again maybe a bit nieve. But I guess I look at it this way, in an actual war you cant replay your turn several times, you getone chance and the outcome quite frequently depends upon chance. So there you have it MHO.

[klesh]

Right, so then I am cheating. He means to load it up, play, save right? One time only?

-FMK.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
Right, so then I am cheating. He means to load it up, play, save right? One time only?

-FMK.

I dont think you were "Cheating" That means to me that you are deliberately doing something to alter the game, KNOWING you are doing something wrong. I am just offering an opinion on what would be a gray area prior to now, that we are currently discussing. If we all agree that reloading several times trying to get the best outcome is cheating then I would say in the future it is. But right now I think we are still debating the issue.

[klesh]

I know, relax. I dont bite

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
I know, relax. I dont bite

Glad of that, too many wounds from the wife already!

I just wanted you to know where I stood and hopefully everyone else stands, as far as Im concerned no one is accusing you of deliberately cheating, let the debate continue.....

[MagyarCrusader]

I don't see what the discussion is about.

You are allowed to load up a game, play as yourself and save the game when your turn is over. If you do ANYTHING else, it is cheating.

OK then, I guess I've cheated before... But what about if you're someone like me who is clumsy with a keyboard and will sometimes accidently move an important unit in the wrong direction? This isn't a real time game, but I shouldn't be allowed to reload a previous save and play the turn again without hitting the wrong button?
Also, if reloading saved games is not allowed how can I be assured others don't do this? I myself have never seen pathetically useless attacks carried out on my cities like I'd be certain to do at times if reloading save games is not allowed. In many scenarios, you have no diplomats or spies to enter cities and get a look at garrisoned units, so you might end up needlessly wasting your entire army trying to take one city. Although I don't read through many PBEM threads, I have never seen anyone report "my troops led a failed attack resulting in complete humiliation and annihilation of 75% of my troops." Has anyone seen this happen? Most players (Xin Yu excluded) are not strategical geniuses so I'd expect to see this quite often, but I don't.

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Darius871
Also, another reason for not having some sort of citizen's militia checking files is that this would require telling a lot of people how to remove passwords for them to do their checks. You have to admit it's dangerous to proliferate that power.

Well, what does everyone think of asking all players at the start of the game to send their password to the auditor (or "referee" - sorry ANZAC, I hate "sheriff" ). Then we don't have to reveal the hidden knowledge of the illuminati.

[klesh]

Hey! PBEM SherifF was my gawdawefull term!

-FMK.

[Case]

Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
Case, did/do you have a problem with that style of play?

Yes and no

I was pretty sure that you were doing it - all your offencives were sucessful, and I think that you strongly hinted at it in one post. The fact that I didn't get all excited at the time is a good indication that I wasn't too concerned.

My problem with it is that it defeats the point of preparing defences, and eliminates any hope of being able to surprise your enemies. You were able to tailor your forces to sucessfully overwelm even my best defended cities, and your monitoring of my troop movements between cities meant that I couldn't try to bluff you out of attacking my weak centre. As such, I had no real hope of ever being able to cripple your forces through defending my cities with lots of units, and that meant that my whole strategy was doomed to failure.

That said, the fundamental reason you kicked my arse is that you simply out-generaled me. Your campaign was supurbly handled, and was sucessful in outmanuvering my limited forces.

So, basically, I guess that my message is: don't do it again

[klesh]

Originally posted by Case
So, basically, I guess that my message is: don't do it again

Okay.

[Darius871]

For God's sake man you didn't have to put yourself on the list, at least for a debatable issue like this. All I meant was that we shouldn't do it from now on, not that anyone that has (apparently a lot more people than I had imagined) is a cheater.

[Darius871]

Has anyone seen this happen?

Well I never prepare an offensive until I know it has enough troops of the right strengh to pull it off, but yes this has happened to me and I've seen it happen to others. Many a time I've been thrown back from the gates of a major city, and there's only one unit left in it before all of my offensive units are exhausted. I could have redone the turn and retried the attack (or postponed the attack altogether) but I didn't.

[The ANZAC]

Well, I think that we can't ban replaying turns.

Here's why: there is no way to tell specifically. There's no evidence that it happens from the save. So then people can be wrongly accused of it if they have big successes. Also, what if in retrospect I want to go back and fix a unit that I accidentally move incorrectly or some production order I want to fix? These are the reasons why you can't properly ban it.

[Darius871]

If someone has combat results that are less likely than 25% in every single turn, IMHO a checker should be able to confidently say he is reloading.

If you move a unit off a railroad or something like that, I have no problem with you reloading the game. What we're talking about here is doing "reconnaisance" by kamikazeing units and then reloading the turn. In effect doing this is ethically identical to revealing the map.

[The ANZAC]

But you can't technically prove it all the time. And that could lead to some inconsistant accusations that can't necessarily be backed up.

[Darius871]

There's a certain point where it gets so ridiculous that they can't deny it.

[The ANZAC]

But what if they are just incredibly lucky?

[Darius871]

Yeah I guess.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by MagyarCrusader Has anyone seen this happen?

Some examples:

"An assault on Irkutsk has met massive failure, and the Kwangtung Army has withdrawn to mass better forces. The struggle for Siberia will certainly be a long and bloody one."

"Yet again our forces have been pushed back from the very gates of Corellia. "

Also the attacks I made on you in the old and new Second Reich games had huge casualties. Not necessarily 75%, but about half. I don't even know if I'll take Czernowitz but if I don't, I don't, and I won't reload it.

Also I'll note that at CFC games of the month, reloading is banned. Even though it can't be reliably enforced, it still could be a matter of course to have a ban in place.