AI relocating workers; Hotseat mode

[SlowThinker]

relocating workers
Do you have any experience with relocating workers by AI? I thought only production may be changed .

I play Seeds of Greatness scenario. Civs are Hittites (white civ), Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, Minoans (purple civ).
I play Babylonians and I noticed the AI relocated workers (to maximize food) in one of my cities. It happened during Minoan turn : Greek save is OK, Minoan isn't.
Then Assyrian leader (germanos) experienced this problem too, but now it was caused by Babylonian turn.

Germanos reports similar problems in Imperialism 1870 PBEM.

We do some testing: It looks if anybody presses F11 (demographics window) then cities of foreign civs may relocate workers.

---

hotseat mode
So why hotseat mode is not used for PBEM games?

advantages of hotseat mode:
1. no problems with AI changing production
2. no problems with AI changing workers
3. normal speed of Settlers (see Accelerated orders (in Multiplayer/Internet mode) )
4. no problems with unintentional clicking on status window and invoking end of turn

Point 4 is very dangerous because AI will manage civs of other humans: units of opponent's may be revealed to you etc.

disavantages of hotseat mode:
1. For online diplomacy exchanges you must load a .hot game in MP mode, then accomplish diplomacy, save and load a .net game in hotseat mode. So it is more complicated.
(Also diplomacy can be managed by Yaroslav's tool (version 3 will include also unit giving). )
2. You cannot use password. But passwords only prevent drunk people from opening foreign civs. [Blah blah blah. Password removal is easy. Seth Green is the secret lovechild of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. The sasquatches are the first wave of the coming alien invasion. Futurama is the best tv show ever.]

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
"What's staying?" - St. Leo

[Password removal is not worth trying unless you are a Mensa member.]

Then again, I remember from CFC you think publicly posting methods of cheating is A-OK, so I guess that's staying.

[SlowThinker]

Hm, the case is opened
I remember from that one year old debate at Civfanatics that some people disagreed and some agreed that cheats should be published. Unfortunately it looks that debate is wipped. I found one page onmy disk so I attach it.

Also I post a copy of summary of my reasons for publishing cheats. It would be good if somebody can post reasons against.

---

1. Fighting with windmills. Anybody can cheat if he decides.
Case posted it is supposed anybody knows about editing rules.txt (because of massive debate due to Willemvanoranje confession); also anybody can do the save/load loop: so what do you want to hide? Do you think there is a difference if people can cheat by 2 ways or 10 ways?

2. Fighting with windmills. People will be able to find cheats and tricks anyway.
The people that would want to cheat and put an effort to find some tricks would be succesfull in most cases. I found the way how to get the password off by a logical procedure when I wanted to see the initial scenario file in one of PBEM threads.

3. The mistrust atmosphere
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r
...mistrust would grow exponentially!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You will say:
A) There are some ways how to cheat, we know them, but we won't reveal them to you because you could eventually try.
B) Cheating is very easy, you can do it this way, but we trust you.
Which sentence brings mistrust? A) or B)?

4. The mistrust atmosphere(2) and capabilities to break obstacles
Imagine two situations:
A) You live in a world where banks deposit banknotes in open shelves. Anybody could steal money easily. There is a trusting atmosphere.
B) You live in a normal world: banks protect money by very sofisticated systems. But you contrived to reveal a loophole there (by an accident or because you struggled for it).
In which situation would you tend to steal easier?

5. The atmosphere of inequal oportunities
Some players will find the un-password trick (or any other tricks) by accident, some players will find it because they want to find it, some players know it from some debate. Do you want to prefer them over other players? They have the right to decide to be honest, others don't?
You also try to push cheaters into an elite group. Don't you think there is an extra reason to cheat if you feel to be "elected"?

6. Detecting the cheating
I think that passwords protect cheaters: If games would be open for everyone (now they are open only for cheaters - be sure most of them know all that tricks) then people (a game watcher or game participant after the game ends) could unmask some blatant cheating when studying savefiles.

[Darius871]

Sigh... hopefully this thread'll just die.

[SlowThinker]

Why, Darius?

[EZRhino]

It is simpler and less painfull to just deny the tools to cheaters, rather than to tell them exactly how to cheat and then catch them.

I think that this method is very irresponsible

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by EZRhino
It is simpler and less painfull to just deny the tools to cheaters, rather than to tell them exactly how to cheat and then catch them.
I think that this method is very irresponsible

Pls read point 1 of my reasons.
How do you want to deny people from save/reload procedure? A cheater needn't to care about any other tool.
(A hypothetical cheater... I suppose most people perceive that cheating would deprive them from all game entertainment: thrill from anticipation, sense of responsibility for own decisions etc. But some people may not perceive that and I think it should be stressed rather than editing my posts and inserting false information there).

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker How do you want to deny people from save/reload procedure?

Irrelevant since the community overwhelmingly decided that reloading isn't cheating. In one game someone admitted to reloading 50+ times, and we had little choice but to tolerate it.

[SlowThinker]

It means attacker wins every combat in such games! You could simply give every unit attack 50 and defense 1 in rules.txt and reloading of combats wouldn't be needed...

Hm, I don't think cheating (map revealing} might cause big harm to so strange games...

Anyway there is 5 other good reasons for publishing cheats that are left.

[SlowThinker]

I found that poll and I switched here: Saving and reloading turns

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
It means attacker wins every combat in such games! You could simply give every unit attack 50 and defense 1 in rules.txt and reloading of combats wouldn't be needed...

That's what I and several other people said, but the community voted for it. What can you do?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Hm, I don't think cheating (map revealing} might cause big harm to so strange games...

That's another argument we used; reloading for 'reconnaissance' brings the same result as revealing the map, so should be considered morally equivalent. This, also, was lost on them.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Anyway there is 5 other good reasons for publishing cheats that are left.

I'm not interested in having this debate; frankly I don't care anymore. This isn't a democracy; the mods positions here and at CFC stand no matter how many letters we type.

Btw, you seem to be posting a lot of threads about PBEM conduct for someone in only one game. If you click here there's numerous open slots available; we can always use another player.

[Darius871]

Since I'm bored, I'll actually go through your points, not that it'll do much good:

Originally posted by SlowThinker
1. Fighting with windmills. Anybody can cheat if he decides.

...which would be preferable to someone with NO intention of cheating stumbling across an easy way to, and deciding it's a good idea.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Case posted it is supposed anybody knows about editing rules.txt (because of massive debate due to Willemvanoranje confession)

Actually, the VAST majority of players here have probably never heard of Willemvanoranje.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
also anybody can do the save/load loop

...which is not considered cheating, for the moment at least.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
so what do you want to hide?

How to remove passwords for one, and you almost blew that out of the water until Leo's edit.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Do you think there is a difference if people can cheat by 2 ways or 10 ways?

ABSOLUTELY.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
2. Fighting with windmills. People will be able to find cheats and tricks anyway.

Ask any of the people here; most would only be able to think of one or two ways. Most players come here thinking about playing some Civ2 and having fun, but when methods of cheating are publicly posted it could light a spark in some of them. Why take the risk?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
The people that would want to cheat and put an effort to find some tricks would be succesfull in most cases.

...denying the possibility that said 'people' might not be able to figure it out. Example: when people forget their passwords or when a player's being replaced, they go to Henrik, Case, or I to get it removed. If it's so easy to figure out, then howcome most people just assume password removal requires some sort of hardcore hex editing? Most potential cheaters also assume this, but now they'll know how simple it is (if they find this thread).

Originally posted by SlowThinker
3. The mistrust atmosphere
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by W.i.n.t.e.r
...mistrust would grow exponentially!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You will say:
A) There are some ways how to cheat, we know them, but we won't reveal them to you because you could eventually try.
B) Cheating is very easy, you can do it this way, but we trust you.
Which sentence brings mistrust? A) or B)?

Which sentence will result in more games ruined by cheating (a dozen of which I've been a part of)? Secure and long-lasting games >>>> a 'trusting atmosphere'.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
4. The mistrust atmosphere(2) and capabilities to break obstacles
Imagine two situations:
A) You live in a world where banks deposit banknotes in open shelves. Anybody could steal money easily. There is a trusting atmosphere.
B) You live in a normal world: banks protect money by very sofisticated systems. But you contrived to reveal a loophole there (by an accident or because you struggled for it).
In which situation would you tend to steal easier?

Um, situation A. You just proved my point, unless you think fun games ruined by cheating are a worthwhile sacrifice for a trusting atmosphere. Is that the case?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
5. The atmosphere of inequal oportunities
Some players will find the un-password trick (or any other tricks) by accident, some players will find it because they want to find it, some players know it from some debate. Do you want to prefer them over other players? They have the right to decide to be honest, others don't?

I don't think people that stumble upon the method are more 'deserving' of the knowledge. I only think that the fewer people who know it (whoever they are), the better.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
6. Detecting the cheating
I think that passwords protect cheaters: If games would be open for everyone (now they are open only for cheaters - be sure most of them know all that tricks) then people (a game watcher or game participant after the game ends) could unmask some blatant cheating when studying savefiles.

Those people who regularly check savegames already know how to remove passwords, so passwords are no barrier to detection. Now I'm sure you're going to say 'well what if someone who doesn't know how to remove passwords wants to check a game?' Answer: they send a PM, IM, or email to Case, Darius871, Henrik, Choke, and/or conmcb25. This is NOT to maintain an 'elite', this is merely to make sure that as few people have the knowledge as possible.

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Darius
This isn't a democracy; the mods positions here and at CFC stand no matter how many letters we type.

These two forums may not be democracy but I could make ways of cheating public by other means. But I appreciate there may be flaws in my set of reasons. This is why I want to speak about it.

Thank you for detailed answers, I will smash your arguments, just wait until I will be bored...

[germanos]

Any news on the apparent Demographics-relocation relation?

Have you been able to look at the imp1870 game?

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker

These two forums may not be democracy but I could make ways of cheating public by other means.

Which are?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
But I appreciate there may be flaws in my set of reasons.

Sorry, but I didn't even read them as reasons. Basically it was a list of reasons 'why posting cheats would make no difference', not reasons why to post them in the first place. The only reason you gave for that was that players would know what to look out for, but this is already shot down by the fact that the 5-6 people who are available to do checks already know what to look for. Do you have a second reason to post the methods other than amusing yourself?

[SlowThinker]

You got me to work, Darius. Here it is:
********************************************
point 1.

Originally posted by Darius

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker also anybody can do the save/load loop

...which is not considered cheating, for the moment at least.

OK. There are 2 possibilities:

a) a game where reloading is not considered as cheating.
This game is warp enough. Warriors kill tanks etc. Any other cheating cannot harm it anymore. You agree yourself:

Originally posted by Darius

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker Hm, I don't think cheating (map revealing} might cause big harm to so strange games...

That's another argument we used; reloading for 'reconnaissance' brings the same result as revealing the map, so should be considered morally equivalent. This, also, was lost on them.

b) a game where reloading is considered as cheating.
My reason remains...

...unless...

Originally posted by Darius

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker Do you think there is a difference if people can cheat by 2 ways or 10 ways?

ABSOLUTELY.

...but you will have to explain it more concrete. Take a game where any warrior can kill a tank and players detect enemy units by moving their own units and reloading back. Explain how the game will be corrupted if somebody will remove a password moreover?
Another point is that you are in contradiction with yourown words in the quote under point a)

---

point 2.

Originally posted by Darius
most would only be able to think of one or two ways.

1. one or two ways are enough IMHO (see last paragraph in point 1)
2. the desired situation is not that most people don't cheat and few cheat. You want that nobody cheats. And the current policy feed possible cheating.

but when methods of cheating are publicly posted it could light a spark in some of them. Why take the risk?

Due to point 1 there is nothing to be risked. Most people can cheat/spoil the game by reloading. Some people can use more ways.

---

point 3.

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker You will say: A) There are some ways how to cheat, we know them, but we won't reveal them to you because you could eventually try. B) Cheating is very easy, you can do it this way, but we trust you. Which sentence brings mistrust? A) or B)?

Which sentence will result in more games ruined by cheating (a dozen of which I've been a part of)?

You forgot to answer...
Ehm... which policy was used in those ruined games? Did you say sentence B) before those games or not?

Secure and long-lasting games >>>> a 'trusting atmosphere'.

What is a secure game?

---

point 4.

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker 4. The mistrust atmosphere(2) and capabilities to break obstacles Imagine two situations: A) You live in a world where banks deposit banknotes in open shelves. Anybody could steal money easily. There is a trusting atmosphere. B) You live in a normal world: banks protect money by very sofisticated systems. But you contrived to reveal a loophole there (by an accident or because you struggled for it). In which situation would you tend to steal easier?

Um, situation A.

Um ...You wouldn't have bad feelings that you used people trust you?
And perceive Civ2 cheating is different. You don't get a free money resp. a free win. You also lose the entertaining elements I described in the thread about reloading.

---

point 5 and 6.

Now I'm sure you're going to say 'well what if someone who doesn't know how to remove passwords wants to check a game?' Answer: they send a PM, IM, or email to Case, Darius871, Henrik, Choke, and/or conmcb25.

If you want to detect possible cheating, then you must open many saves. You never know in advance which you will want to open and you won't be willing to wait hours for each one.

This is NOT to maintain an 'elite', this is merely to make sure that as few people have the knowledge as possible.

But the cheater will feel like an elite man after getting over some obstacles. And he will want to exploit his 'work'. This wouldn't happen if his 'secret knowledges' weren't secret but public.

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Darius
Sorry, but I didn't even read them as reasons. Basically it was a list of reasons 'why posting cheats would make no difference',

I suppose you think about points 1 and 2 only now. Other points explain why the current PBEM policy intensify the possibility that somebody will cheat.

Do you have a second reason to post the methods other than amusing yourself?

1. I want to diminish a possibility that players will cheat.
2. I don't like any kind of censorship (and elements that flow it) in any sphere of human activity.
But I don't amuse myself very well . From other side I am trying to get some positive experience from any situation, so I watch if it is possible to get people think logically about their intuitive stands. The one year old debate at CivFanatics was very triste from this point of view. Thank you for expressing arguments now.

Our goal is very similar. But your policy comes out from a fear that most people would start cheating but don't care if only few people do it. My policy want to clear cheating completely.
You are simply more pesimistic that me: IMHO if you explain to players that there is nothing heroic on cheating (you explain anybody can do it) and you stress that cheating would deprive them from all entertaining elements of the game then only idiot will cheat.
Another problem is there are no rules in PBEM games and some people got accustomed to things like reloading...

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by germanos
Any news on the apparent Demographics-relocation relation?
Have you been able to look at the imp1870 game?

I didn't accomplish any tests that you don't know about.
But I can report that existing tests proved the Demographics window relocates workers and there weren't noticed any others causes of relocating.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
OK. There are 2 possibilities:

a) a game where reloading is not considered as cheating.

This game is warp enough. Warriors kill tanks etc. Any other cheating cannot harm it anymore. You agree yourself:

Quote:

That's another argument we used; reloading for 'reconnaissance' brings the same result as revealing the map, so should be considered morally equivalent. This, also, was lost on them.

Note the words 'was lost on them'; my argument doesn't matter since reloading is still legal. Whether the game is warped or not, the players in the game decided to not have it be cheating.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
b) a game where reloading is considered as cheating.

What about it?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
...but you will have to explain it more concrete. Take a game where any warrior can kill a tank and players detect enemy units by moving their own units and reloading back. Explain how the game will be corrupted if somebody will remove a password moreover?

You're putting words in my mouth; I never said 10 cheats in a game are worse than 2 cheats in a game. I said that having the general public know 10 methods of cheating is worse than having them know 2 methods of cheating. Two very different things.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Another point is that you are in contradiction with yourown words in the quote under point a)

Sorry, I don't know what you're referring to here.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
1. one or two ways are enough IMHO (see last paragraph in point 1)

See my response to that paragraph; I was referring to one or two methods of cheating being publicly known, not used in a particular game.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
2. the desired situation is not that most people don't cheat and few cheat. You want that nobody cheats. And the current policy feed possible cheating.

Explain how hiding methods of cheating encourages cheating. You could say that hiding them makes little difference, and that people who want to can find them out on their own, and that's a reasonable position. However, saying that it encourages cheating is ridiculous.

Originally posted by SlowThinker

Due to point 1 there is nothing to be risked. Most people can cheat/spoil the game by reloading. Some people can use more ways.

You really need to take reloading out of this discussion completely. You can't say 'a game is already corrupted by reloading, so people knowing and using other cheats makes no difference', because in all but a few games reloading is not considered cheating, and hence using the real cheats are what corrupt the game.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
You forgot to answer...

The nature of the question implied what my answer would be. IMO, A brings mistrust but lower cheating, and B brings trust but higher cheating. Trust is less important to me than having games survive.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Ehm... which policy was used in those ruined games? Did you say sentence B) before those games or not?

*Sigh*, the fact that that cheating occurred under the current policy does not prove that said policy encourages cheating. If you seriously think it does, that's like saying the mayor of a city is directly responsible for every murder that occurs in his city, which is of course false logic.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
What is a secure game?

A game in which cheating does not occur.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Um ...You wouldn't have bad feelings that you used people trust you?
And perceive Civ2 cheating is different. You don't get a free money resp. a free win. You also lose the entertaining elements I described in the thread about reloading.

Sorry again, but I have no clue what this means.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
If you want to detect possible cheating, then you must open many saves. You never know in advance which you will want to open and you won't be willing to wait hours for each one.

What does this have to do with publishing methods of cheating?

Not only is this irrelevant, it's wrong. Normally when someone checks a file it is because a player has com to him with a suspicion about a specific turn, and the checker looks at that file. Nobody (except for Duke of Marlbrough at CFC) checks random files, so your point is moot.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
But the cheater will feel like an elite man after getting over some obstacles. And he will want to exploit his 'work'. This wouldn't happen if his 'secret knowledges' weren't secret but public.

IMO, they usually cheat in order to win (or simply not lose) the game, not to marvel in their computer skills (if you don't believe me, I can probably get a few to testify this to you). It is from this perspective that I say public knowledge would increase cheating.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
I suppose you think about points 1 and 2 only now. Other points explain why the current PBEM policy intensify the possibility that somebody will cheat.

I still don't see how hiding cheating methods encourages cheating, and I don't read it in your points. I don't see how an atmosphere of mistrust and elitism (neither of which I've noticed in my time here) entices one to cheat. Also, detection cannot possibly prevent someone from cheating, as it is only a response.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
1. I want to diminish a possibility that players will cheat.

Considering we haven't had a single incident in half a year (immediately after a half-year with cheater after cheater after cheater), I'm pretty damn confident in the current system, and dop't want to rock the boat. Once there are several cheaters caught you can start talking about change. Cheating is such a tiny issue these days, I have no clue why you're making such a big deal out of it.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
2. I don't like any kind of censorship (and elements that flow it) in any sphere of human activity.

So far that's the only argument you've made so far that I can sympathise with.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Our goal is very similar. But your policy comes out from a fear that most people would start cheating but don't care if only few people do it. My policy want to clear cheating completely.

Again: how would telling people (who have never even thought of cheating in their entire time here) every way there is to cheat end all cheating, now and forever? That position to me is downright insane.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
You are simply more pesimistic that me: IMHO if you explain to players that there is nothing heroic on cheating (you explain anybody can do it) and you stress that cheating would deprive them from all entertaining elements of the game then only idiot will cheat.

AND THE WORLD IS FULL OF IDIOTS!!! Thieves know full well that they could go to jail if they steal, but they do it anyway. Husbands know full well that they could face a divorce if they cheat on their wives, but they do it anyway. Kids know full well they could crash and get a concussion if they don't wear their helmets while riding their bikes, but they do it anyway. Drunk drivers know full well they could get in a car crash when driving drunk, but they do it anyway. Crackheads know full well that they might overdose if they smoke too much rock, but they do it anyway. Cheaters knew that they'd lose the "entertaining elements" of the game and not look heroic if they cheated, but they did it anyway. This is not pessimism, this is realism.