Ruleset Discussion

[mzprox]

Originally Posted by HUSch

It's more a player take a quick chance, not the AI gives some a bad/good luck.
If one thinks, he has a chance to eliminate an other good. If this fails, he has lost all chances in this game. Early war with a neighbour costs the victory, I think.

I don't talk about AI nor costly early war, but the wandering of the first unit which -if it gets lucky-can eliminate a neighbour while it's building a worker/workboat.
And don't tell me that if I'm worried I should start with a warrior, because no one will delay the first worker with 3-4 turns.
Anyway I'm not expecting rulechange because of this, I'm just as i've said worried that our or someone else's civ would get eliminated this way.

[DaveShack]

Originally Posted by Lord Parkin

They affect the following turn though. If Team A plays, then Team B moves in a stack out of the fog, then Team A logs back in and changes its builds/research and whips/drafts units in response to the new information, that will affect Team B's chances of e.g. taking a city.

On the flip side, since B has the luxury of having seen everything that A has done, they have a major advantage in being able to do all those things in response to A and have them take effect immediately. All of A's actions are effectively delayed a turn compared to B's actions, in identical but reversed scenarios.

Under this rule proposal looks to me like it is clearly an advantage, after the first turn, to be on the "defending" side of the timer.

An alternative rule that I've seen was that A could do non-movement actions between B's movements and EOT. IE split the timer into 3 sections instead of 2:

A moves
B moves
A and B are both allowed to do non-movement actions.

Now a bunch of people will say that's difficult/impossible to enforce. If the mod didn't just control/monitor logins, but instead monitored what in-game actions are taken, then it would indeed be possible to enforce. But if we're trying to create absolute fairness, personally I'd prefer a fair rule over an enforceable one. I also have a global preference for winning by overwhelming force in-game over whining about technicalities to get a penalty imposed or a redo. Not that I actually win that much -- and I prefer to lose by overwhelming force than whine about technicalities...

Speaking for myself, not as a representative of CivFanatics.

[Regis Hastur]

Originally Posted by mzprox

On a different topic: am I the only one who thinks we should avoid early elimination by chance? I mean the not soo unlikely event when a wandering warrior finds an unprotected city which is busy producing its first workers.

Fixed your problem

[fluffyflyingpig]

Originally Posted by DaveShack

On the flip side, since B has the luxury of having seen everything that A has done, they have a major advantage in being able to do all those things in response to A and have them take effect immediately. All of A's actions are effectively delayed a turn compared to B's actions, in identical but reversed scenarios.

Under this rule proposal looks to me like it is clearly an advantage, after the first turn, to be on the "defending" side of the timer.

An alternative rule that I've seen was that A could do non-movement actions between B's movements and EOT. IE split the timer into 3 sections instead of 2:

A moves
B moves
A and B are both allowed to do non-movement actions.

Now a bunch of people will say that's difficult/impossible to enforce. If the mod didn't just control/monitor logins, but instead monitored what in-game actions are taken, then it would indeed be possible to enforce. But if we're trying to create absolute fairness, personally I'd prefer a fair rule over an enforceable one. I also have a global preference for winning by overwhelming force in-game over whining about technicalities to get a penalty imposed or a redo. Not that I actually win that much -- and I prefer to lose by overwhelming force than whine about technicalities...

Speaking for myself, not as a representative of CivFanatics.

This is a very interesting suggestion Dave.

However, from what I have been able to glean from what extremely little documentation this mod has, this is not possible.

[SevenSpirits]

I can think of two advantages of being first in turn order immediately:

1) You get to move newly-produced units first - your cities can produce units which can then immediately move before your opponent even knows they exist. Whereas you can e.g. retreat your chariot if your opponent's city completes a spear.

2) You're half a turn ahead of your opponent!

[Regis Hastur]

Hello folks,

We are a bit confused, cause spionage and reli/civic swap rules are changed after snakepick has started. We demand a final and clear rule what is allowed and what is not.
As far as I know spionage is on and civic/reli swap is allowed. Can this be confirmed?

Regis

[Sommerswerd]

Confirmed

[Yuufo]

Does a finalized ruleset proposal exist, that I should present to my team for validation?

[Sommerswerd]

No. Not yet we are developing that now.

[Lord Parkin]

Yuufo (and others), look to these posts:

Proposed General Rules

Proposed Double Move Rule

There are a few minor things which have yet to be decided - such as determining exactly when and how map information can be traded - but on the whole these two posts cover most issues of importance that have been brought up so far. They are not a final version of the rules, but they're a good idea of what the final version will look like.

It'd be good if the folks on your team (and all others) have a careful look at these two posts and decide whether you're happy with all the things covered so far. If there are some things you're not quite happy with, you can suggest what tweaks you would like to see.

[Yuufo]

The Proposed General Rules state that civic/reli switch spionage missions are forbidden.
Is this correct and definitive? I read lots of debate about it.

[tobiasn]

Yeah Yuufo the final vote is to allow these missions. The proposed general rules are outdated in that regard, hopefully someone can fix it to stop further confusion.

[fluffyflyingpig]

Teams both voted and changed their vote after the ruleset was proposed regarding espionage. Updated rules:

1 Out of Game Actions
1.1 -- Team Espionage
All external forms of intelligence gathering against opposing teams are not allowed.
example: Entering Team Forums, joining multiple teams using different accounts, actively petitioning other players for information, looking around on the CFC (or a 3rd party website) image database for screenshots and save uploads, or anything else deemed as deliberate espionage is not tolerated will be harshly dealt with.

1.2 -- Save Manipulation
Editing the save file (with or without a utility) is not allowed.

1.3 -- Pitboss Host
The Pitboss Host is located at IP: 178.17.156.11:XXXX. Disrupting access to the Pitboss host server is not allowed.

1.4 -- Contact
Teams making diplomatic contact (meeting privately to discuss the game, game-related deals, etc.) before they have met in-game is not allowed.

2 In Game Actions
2.1 -- Victory
The winner of the game is the first team recognized the winner by in-game victory dialog. All victory conditions are enabled. Permanent Alliances are not allowed.

2.2 -- Suicide Training
Knowingly sacrificing a unit to an ally in order to yield experience points to the victorious unit is not allowed.

2.3 -- Nukes
ICBMs and Tactical Nukes are not allowed.

3 In Game Gifts
3.1 -- Naval Unit Gifting
Gifting boats loaded with units or units loaded within boats is not allowed

3.2 -- Double Move Gifting
Gifting units to another civilization after they have moved or attacked in a turn is not allowed.

3.3 -- City Gifting
City transfers via the in-game diplomacy interface are not allowed.
Conquest, culture flip, UN resolution, and AP resolution are the only permitted methods of city transfer.

3.4 -- Heroic Epic Unit Gifting
Gifting units with the experience required to build the Heroic Epic to teams that do not already have unit that unlocks the Heroic Epic or have not already built the Heroic Epic is not allowed

3.4 -- Unit Gifting
Gifting a unit with experience needed to promote to Level 4 to teams who have not built the Heroic Epic and cannot currently do so is not allowed. Gifting a unit with experience needed to promote to Level 6 to teams who have not built West Point and cannot currently do so is not allowed.

4 Game Procedure
4.1 -- Turn Timer
24 hour Pitboss server turn timer.
The game may remain paused up to 120 hours after a post in the turn-tracker thread, at which point any team may un-pause the game so play may resume.
An official vote to 'continue sooner' may be posted by any team in the turn-tracker thread. Each such vote by a team will reduce the 120 hour extension by 24 hours.

4.2 -- Game Administrator
r_rolo1 has sole authority as game administrator. Replacement of the game administrator must be agreed to by all teams.

4.3 -- Bugs and Exploits
The use of any bug or exploit is not allowed.
The decision about exactly what constitutes a bug or exploit rests solely with the admin. Consult with the admin if any action you are considering may be a bug or exploit.

4.4 -- Rule Violation Reporting
All rule violations must be reported to the game admin as soon as they are discovered.

4.5 -- Voting
All votes during the game require unanimous agreement by all teams. If teams cannot reach unanimous agreement the decision will be decided by the game administrator.

4.6 -- Rule Violations
If teams fail to reach unanimous agreement resolving any rule dispute, the game admin has sole authority to resolve the dispute.

4.7 -- Defeated Teams
Player on teams that are eliminated are permitted to join another team. These "refugee" players are free to share any information from their old team with their new team. They may NOT engage in team espionage by reporting information on their new team to any other team.

[Yuufo]

Ok thanks guys

[DaveShack]

Does the mod actually prohibit logins, or does it just report them? If it only reports them, then the 3-phase method is possible. Or we have the option to keep the 3-phase proposal and revisit the decision on the mod given that the game hasn't actually started.

TBH the reason I wanted the mod was for the BUG stuff. The interface improvements are worth their lines of code in gold.

Speaking for myself and not a CivFanatics rep.

[mostly-harmless]

I suggest to include West Point into Rule 3.4 as well.

mh

[2metraninja]

Originally Posted by mostly-harmless

I suggest to include West Point into Rule 3.4 as well.

mh

And why is that?

[mostly-harmless]

Doesn't West Point need a unit of sufficient XP as well?

mh

[talonschild]

It does - level 6.

[2metraninja]

I misread it like 4.3 and was wondering what unknown bug hides West Point

Personally I am against this 3.4 rule, but we will make the rules later.