View Full Version : I hate rules but a clear bottom line is needed
In the game against Erikk I just ran into an undescribed rule, namely that the 2nd (or last player?) in a PBEM round has to announce that some other civ has build a certain wonder. I was not aware of that rule and did not report any of those, sorry for that.
Anyway, if there are more of those rules (undescribed ones) imo these should be very clear or simply not applicable. Also, being a rule minimalist, imo we do not need a rule if the Civ version we are playing with offers a way out. Like in this case, Erik could have found out by himself that I had build the Great Library by going thru the F-keys.
Just to give a reference, Col and anarres most likely remember the discussion we had in the Tournament over the chance of a cultural victory and how that chance easily could be obtained from "admiring" and "in awe" from the Advisors.
So any comments and/or undescribed rules appreciated!
Summary of basic rules
Just to have a basic set, everyone is free of course to agree otherwise.
Battle reports:
In human vs. human battles players report to each other on the battle, including type and number of units used and wins / losses / withdrawals. Typicially the things visible in Single Player.
2nd player reports AI vs. 1st player???
Spy missions
Failed spy missions vs. human players where the spy is caught are reported to that player. If the spy is successful or gets away with it no report is needed.
Recommended to agree before the game starts
- Reporting of typical End-of-turn messages by the last human player in the Q. Wonder, diplo messages etc. Most if not all that info can be gained from the advisors.
- MPP and / or MA vs. human players.
Exploits
NOTE: this is not defining what an exploit is, it as an overview of what a lot of people consider exploitive. Feel free to agree differently in your game.
- Using the advisor screens while in build part of the turn for things like revolt gambling, tile-sharing, tax/lux/sci adjustments.
- Resource disconnection.
- Changing preferences during the game without agreement with the other players.
- And more, Sky promised to compile a list.
Out of the top of my head:
-some of us ask a full battle report during war. I've never played like that yet, but some of us find it the normal thing to do.
-when a spy mission fails on the other human player, that player will NOT get a message. So when you get the message that the other party is angry, it should be reported. It is not needed when the spy got away though.
quote:Originally posted by Aggie
Out of the top of my head:
:D Aggie, that is exactly the point!
quote:-some of us ask a full battle report during war. I've never played like that yet, but some of us find it the normal thing to do. But that are rules you discuss in advance right? Like the RBCiv rules in your game with Sky. And like the no MA / no MPP rules Erikk and me agreed.
quote:-when a spy mission fails on the other human player, that player will NOT get a message. So when you get the message that the other party is angry, it should be reported. It is not needed when the spy got away though.
This is one that could be in the bottom line rules, although I do not fully understand it.
quote:quote:-when a spy mission fails on the other human player, that player will NOT get a message. So when you get the message that the other party is angry, it should be reported. It is not needed when the spy got away though.
This is one that could be in the bottom line rules, although I do not fully understand it.
Suppose that you try to steal a tech from the AI. When that fails, the AI will get mad and might even declare war! However, the information that your spy was caught will not reach another human player. I think it is only fair that you then tell what happened, to follow the spirit of the game. So only when the spy is caught, not when you got away or when the mission was a success.
And my first "rule": I think you are right about the fact that it should be agreed upon, but it might be that others expect you to inform about battle reports anyway!
quote:Originally posted by Aggie
-when a spy mission fails on the other human player, that player will NOT get a message. So when you get the message that the other party is angry, it should be reported. It is not needed when the spy got away though.
So bottom line rule is like: if a human player fails a spy mission that player should notify the other human players?
quote:And my first "rule": I think you are right about the fact that it should be agreed upon, but it might be that others expect you to inform about battle reports anyway!
Personally I like to keep a log in the spoiler on what is happening in the game, but should the rule not be "discuss and agree before or during the game"?
I dont see why the other player should get the info that your spy has failed. I wouldnt expect to be told. I should get only the info available via the diplo screen.
Only about failed spy missions on the other human should be told IMO. Battle reports,
in-turn AI stuff (wonders build, MA's, MPP's, embargos etc) are abvious I guess...
DrAlimentado
03-01-2004, 23:13
I agree Beam! There are certain rules like this that are totally assumed by many players (to the point of righteous indignation if you fail to do it... [shit-stirrer]), yet nowhere is it stated what these rules are.
I actually agree with most of these rules, I just think they should be stated somewhere on the site - maybe a 'general rules' section. So we can say 'I use all the general rules, except I am easy about reporting over-precise battle reports' or whatever.
Here's my stab at the unwritten rules:
1. Last player has to inform others of wonder pop-ups. (are there any other generic pop-ups only the last player gets? if so then they should also be here imo)
2. Detailed battle reports - all players should give a detailed (not quite blow by blow but certainly unit by unit) battle report. Should include bombards, kills, retreats, leaders generated etc.
3. Spy missions - if they succeed then obviously you should say nothing, but if they fail to get away (are caught) you should report it! This is because otherwise being caught spying has no effect at all besides costing cash and wasting your spying chance.
I'm not saying these rules are set in stone - I'm saying imo these should be the STATED baseline rules that players can agree from.
On a sidenote, maybe we should think about bringing these up with the ISDG... mwuhahahahahaha.
DrAlimentado
03-01-2004, 23:16
quote:Originally posted by ERIKK
Only about failed spy missions on the other human should be told IMO. Battle reports,
in-turn AI stuff (wonders build, MA's, MPP's, embargos etc) are abvious I guess...
They are only obvious if you have played someone who uses this rule, as a first time pbem-er I was completely unaware of these 'obvious' rules :)
quote:Originally posted by col
I dont see why the other player should get the info that your spy has failed. I wouldnt expect to be told. I should get only the info available via the diplo screen.
IMVHO the diplo info is buggy. I think it is a serious error in pbem that you aren't informed! So I expect my opponent to mention it...
First off nobody say it was a "rule" !
I was pulling your leg of course :D
Second, you are totally right we should write that kinda stuff here on the site but we could not get our fingers out of our asses...
Third the rule is simple : anything that means you get an advantage over your opponent because of a *bug* or programming problem of Civ3 should not be exploited.
For example :
Player 2 getting wonder completion messages and not player 1 = unfair advantage, not meant to be like that : in SP everybody gets the message.
Game not telling you when someone has tried to steal = unfair advantage, not meant to be like that : in SP any civ will know someone tried to steal from them !
Get my drift ? ;)
Also when you say you keep a spoiler : now what good is that for your opponent's battle report since he cant read it ? [lol]
EDIT : Cross posted with DrA and ten other posts [rolleyes]
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
EDIT : Cross posted with DrA and ten other posts [rolleyes]
NO!! It is good to have different point of views. Even yours ;)
Well ours are the same so...
quote:First off nobody say it was a "rule" !
I was pulling your leg of course
Sky, you made a clear and fair point, nothing pers. involved here.
My point basically is to be clear about what is "obvious" and what is to be decided among players. I missed an obvious one tonight but in this case clearly settled with erik, just want to avoid any of this in the future by being clear about it.
I agree that anything one player gets the other player should get. Thats only fair but there is no need to go any further than that. There is no need for parity with SP and the AI at all.
Wonder completions are not an issue - they can be checked with f7. I thought neither player got a failed spy message which is Ok since its the same for both. Each player sees the results of their own combats so why inform anyone of anything?
DrAlimentado
04-01-2004, 11:16
There certainly is room for debate on what needs reporting, all that is important of course is that both players agree to the same thing before starting a game.
The problem at the moment is that quite a number of players DO expect battle reports and wonder reports etc. and consider it as being too obvious to need mentioning! Whilst I agree with the reports that isn't important - what's important is to avoid the situation of getting halfway through a game and then discovering that you are playing by different rules.
Instead of stating baseline rules (which would indicate a preference one way or another) perhaps all we need to do is state the baseline 'issues' - and players need to be aware they need to state the obvious before starting a game.
Its getting so that there needs to be a lot of negotiation before a game even starts. I think I'm with Meli these days - anything goes and dont expect any favours ;)
DrAlimentado
04-01-2004, 11:31
LOL, fair enough, but millions disagree ;)
quote:Originally posted by col
Its getting so that there needs to be a lot of negotiation before a game even starts. I think I'm with Meli these days - anything goes and dont expect any favours ;)
It's not that bad. Usually it takes not more than 10 minutes to agree on things. And I stick to all agreements that I make. And until now all my opponents did so as well..
my 2cents:
- Battle reports. I want em when my units are attacked by other human player, so I know what losses my opponents has suffered instead of just seeing fog where my unit used to be. Other battles, I dont need to know unless I ask for them.
- Spying missions. When spying on an AI I wouldn't know why I should tell the other human player(s) when it failed. You dont get a message on AI-AI spying in SP too. The human/human spying can be told but isnt a must tell for me either. The advantage of not being told goes both ways, so if you agree not to tell, noone has an advantage. So I would say telling a spy mission failed isn't a rule unless agreed upon by both players.
Wonder reports: Check the f7 screen, you bunch of lazy cunts :)
" anything goes and dont expect any favours " : Meli [goodjob] I think so too.
Just trying to group what rules there are:
1. Civ embedded, that is the rules that come with the sav. Normally standard but for example addition of an extra unit by the mapmaker is prediscussed. Anything is possible if players agree.
2. Exploits, an uptodate overview can come in handy. Is there one?
3. Human behaviour rules, this could be anything between zero and the full set of RBCiv rules. Typical examples are: no MA and MPP vs. the human (isn't this an assumed one??), war is not declared until a certain date or tech.
4. Reporting rules, i.e. the failed spy attempt and human vs. human battle reports are basically the ones. Wonders and diplo agreements can be retrieved from the respective screens. I do not really see a need to have those mandatory, it could be agreed between players however.
So the list of "assumed" rules can be very short, everything else to be agreed between players imo.
The only rule I assume (which I won't anymore ;)) is that battle reports are given for human-human wars. I also like to agree to tell about failed spy missions, but that's not a huge problem if it is left out.
To be honest, anything not explicitly agreed before you start isn't a rule. The battle reports I would count as an exception, as to me it's essential to the game, but if anyone I was playing refused to give them it would still be my fault for not agreeing the rule before the game. Which reminds me - can we agree to battle reports in our game please Beam? [lol]
quote:Originally posted by anarres
Which reminds me - can we agree to battle reports in our game please Beam? [lol]
[thumb2][evil]
[?] Is there a recent list of what are considered exploits?
quote:Originally posted by anarres
The only rule I assume (which I won't anymore ;)) is that battle reports are given for human-human wars. [lol]
I see no reason to make any more reports than Human - Human battle reports. I don't get the point of reveiling the failures of my secret service [???] . I agree with what PP said about it I think.
Like Beam, I seriously dislike too many rules.
Special rules on exploits (I hate exploits) can be made at the beginning of a PBEM
To all : I am working on a definite list of rules and exploits for ladder pbems that will be a live document.
@ Stapel : If you make an attempt at stealing an AI and you fail, the AI *will* know for sure and you have to pay the consequences. Why should it be any different in Human v Human ?
If you attempt to steal an AI tech you, of course, never have to tell anyone. I really dont know how this came about it makes no sense...
The fact you dont get notified is because of a bug or implementation problem of PBEM turn sequence (just like Player 1 getting no Wonder pop-up messages).
IMO Spying is *broken* according to me in PBEM because it is so cheap and a tech leader can get his whole game ruined on a lucky steal from his backward opponent (Ithink you would knwo about that ? [groucho] )
Why make it even worse ?
So, what if I try to steal your tech, I fail, and I tell you I tried and failed.
What are you going to do with that info? Call my mother ;)
What do you do with regular sologame info when an AI fails and there comes a pop-up?
I am missing a certain feature? I don't see a reason to know, thus no reason to tell.
Well there are indeed *many* things that can be done Stapel !
And what I do with the information is my problem, not yours.
You are missing a certain feature indeed.
It is a definite feature of Civ3 that your opponent (AI or Human) knows about
any failed Spying mission perfomed on their empire. It is not intended that this feature
is not available in PBEM games and it is very easily replaced by simple fair play of telling your opponent.
Not complying to it is an exploit, sorry.
If both players wish NOT to talk about spying missions , that can be something agreed beforehand.
Not the other way round!
I dont understand your point about "regular solo" games, we are talking about PBEMs here.
Stapel, I think that to know about your opponent's effort to steal is to some degree valuable in that it tells you something about his desperation to get back into the tech race. It's no jaw-dropper, but I for one would like to know if it happened to me.
My point: what can I possibly do with the information someone spied on me, but failed? Either a Human in a PBEM, or an AI in a regular solo game, or an AI in a PBEM game?
Since I still think the answer to that question is nothing (please enlighten me ;) ), I don't see the point in being obliged to share this info.
[wallbash]
Stapel, Plux just gave you a very good reason why its important to *know*, you are only focused on what you can *do* !
A huge part of winning a PBEM is about "knowing" because with the right information you can then *do* the right things and win !
But more importantly, you are missing the many ways spying missions can be countered ! Do you really want me to explain here ?
quote:Originally posted by Plux
Stapel, I think that to know about your opponent's effort to steal is to some degree valuable in that it tells you something about his desperation to get back into the tech race. It's no jaw-dropper, but I for one would like to know if it happened to me.
That's all? It might tell you something about his desperation? Maybe he isn't desperate, but just on the hunt for cheap techs?
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
But more importantly, you are missing the many ways spying missions can be countered ! Do you really want me to explain here ?
Yup!
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
[wallbash]
Stapel, Plux just gave you a very good reason why its important to *know*, you are only focused on what you can *do* !
A huge part of winning a PBEM is about "knowing" because with the right information you can then *do* the right things and win !
But you can only assume things! Not know things!
-You can assume he is rich, as he wouldn't have tried otherways.
-You can assume he is poor, as he lost money.
-Just like you can assume someone is behind in techs and desperate.
-You can assume he simply wants cheap techs!
Assumption is mother of all fuck-ups.
If someone tried a tech steal on me before industrial and failed I would seriously consider going to war to stop further steals.
Indeed anarres. That way you prevent that the other human can do it again until the CIA. Furthermore, when the humans are at war and you get the message of a failed steal attempt (where the human is caught), you KNOW that the other has a spy and you can try to uncover it...
EDIT: Oh wait...the spy will then be killed of course. But still it is vital info. You know then that the other has no spy anymore and has to wait for a few turns to try again. So you know that the opponent can't see your military etc...
And after the industrial age, once you've learned someone is stealing from you, or is attempting to do so, you could for example monitor their gold reserves for a few turns by investigating a small city, and based upon that knowledge find out how frequent they could make an attempt, and decide that continuing your own research program is not worth it since your opponent can steal faster and more frequently than you can research the techs yourself, and at lower prices.
That does seem to be a very big in-game decision to me based solely on the knowledge of whether they are stealing techs from you or not.
Of course, spying on someone is quite a good way of provoking a war. Works just as well on human opponents too ;)
quote:Originally posted by anarres
If someone tried a tech steal on me before industrial and failed I would seriously consider going to war to stop further steals.
This I find the only good reason...
quote:Originally posted by Stapel
quote:Originally posted by anarres
If someone tried a tech steal on me before industrial and failed I would seriously consider going to war to stop further steals.
This I find the only good reason...
That's a start [thumbsup]. That means that you are beginning to understand why a number of us (including me) want this info.
There are other very game specific reasons. You may or may not agree with those, but imho that is not the point. The point is that it is seen as valuable info which is not given due to the fact that FIRAXIS didn't think it through in PBEM/hotseat.
On a side note: I did a research back in the old PTW days regaring tech stealing. It turned out that a careful steal did have as much chance of success (roughly) as a safe steal (in my test). Only drawback of careful steal: the chance of being noticed when it fails is far higher. By not telling your human opponent of a failed tech steal, you would be foolish to waste money; you would always try a careful steal...
quote:Originally posted by Aggie
On a side note: I did a research back in the old PTW days regaring tech stealing. It turned out that a careful steal did have as much chance of success (roughly) as a safe steal (in my test). Only drawback of careful steal: the chance of being noticed when it fails is far higher. By not telling your human opponent of a failed tech steal, you would be foolish to waste money; you would always try a careful steal...
Unless you don't care shit about your opponent to know it failed / you tried.
I still think I wouldn't really dramatically change my plans if I knew my opponent was trying to steal stuff. He is the enemy anyway!
DrAlimentado
09-01-2004, 15:58
But maybe you have a complex treaty that forbids spying? Or maybe you just use the info to extrapolate exactly what tech level your opponent has? I myself would at the very minimum use the info to make some pompous rhetoric about how the backstabbing duplicitous playernation had been caught attempting to steal our glorious tech - and use it as levarage in any subsequent negotiations :D
The point is that the information can only be useful, if we got popups in pbem like you do in solo we wouldn't complain about getting the information would we? And Aggie is right - spying without having to report a failed mission is risk-free, and obviously dosen't work as intended from a design point of view... I like the spying part of the game a lot (mwuhahaha) but it only really works from a game mechanics aspect if you can get caught spying, which means reporting the stuff firaxis failed to implement in multiplayer.
Recent discussions convinced me set up a sort of game type rules.
- no rules, free fight
- medium rules, to be filtered out of this thread
- tight rules, almost nothing is allowed, also to be filtered out of this discussion
lets get rid of these annoying discussions!
quote:Originally posted by ERIKK
Recent discussions convinced me set up a sort of game type rules.
- no rules, free fight
- medium rules, to be filtered out of this thread
- tight rules, almost nothing is allowed, also to be filtered out of this discussion
lets get rid of these annoying discussions!
Roger that Erik, I will try to make summary and copy that in the opening post. I recall that in that recent discussion exploits also are a big part.
From page 1:
Summary of basic rules
Just to have a basic set, everyone is free of course to agree otherwise.
Battle reports:
In human vs. human battles players report to each other on the battle, including type and number of units used and wins / losses / withdrawals. Typicially the things visible in Single Player.
2nd player reports AI vs. 1st player???
Spy missions
Failed spy missions vs. human players where the spy is caught are reported to that player. If the spy is successful or gets away with it no report is needed.
Recommended to agree before the game starts
- Reporting of typical End-of-turn messages by the last human player in the Q. Wonder, diplo messages etc. Most if not all that info can be gained from the advisors.
- MPP and / or MA vs. human players.
Exploits
NOTE: this is not defining what an exploit is, it as an overview of what a lot of people consider exploitive. Feel free to agree differently in your game.
- Using the advisor screens while in build part of the turn for things like revolt gambling, tile-sharing, tax/lux/sci adjustments.
- Resource disconnection.
- Changing preferences during the game without agreement with the other players.
- And more, Sky promised to compile a list.
Just wondering why, after 1,5 days, there is so little response.
Please keep in mind that this is not an attempt to create a rulebook for pbem's, but more an effort to come to a base set describing the assumed and undescribed. And where players among themselves add or remove rules pre-game or in-game.
Feedback and Skies overview of exploits very much appreciated!
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.