I am surprised that anyone is this passionate about something that involves such little effort as entering a password, CB.
Not to belittle your position, everyone has a right to their opinion, its just that the risk to effort proportion is just so out of balance in favor of password protecting the game if we have take over AI on that I am simply amazed that this is even a point of contention.
CB Droege said:
You'll find griefers in places like gamespy, not here.
OK, lets say that this is absolutely true. Can you seriously assert that this will be true a year from now after everyone has put considerable time into the game? Civ4 has been out less than a year, so why would anyone assume that the greifers wont eventually make their presence in this game too?
'If you build it they will come' seems to apply to greifers, with the 'it' being any multi-player game on the internet that is not password protected.
In *every* game I have seen on the internet, greifers eventualy show up and screw with things just because they can. Why take that risk?
In every game I have seen you have cheaters; in Civ4 terms that would be someone running multiple civs in the same game under different accounts, taking over an AI nation to declare war or evacuate cities the player is about to attack, etc. It spoils a game compeltely when someone is caught doing that, at least in my view.
Why should all of us risk such cheating and vulnerability when all we have to do is enter one more password when the game starts up? I dont get it.
CB Droege said:
besides, the only time you'll need the security (if at all) is right when the game starts. After that, all the civs will be taken, and each civ will have a password.
That is looking presumptive right now. Maybe you are right, but maybe also this game format isnt as popular or trusted as the random start and we might end up with only a dozen or so people also. We could be sitting here a long time waiting for that 24th person, no?
CB Droege said:
Alos, the game can be saved as often as you like, so if something gets really borked somehow, we can always go back to a recent save.
I dont think that is as simple as you seem to think it is.
Say we have suspicions that a player is taking over the AI of a second civ and is using it to start wars or abandon territory. How do you determine how far back to go to re-establish the game integrity? It would seem that you would have to go back to the first time that they took a city from the AI or the first time I noticed someone logged in under an AI civ and the kick button was left active. How far back would that have to go? How many weeks of play would get wiped out just so we can skip a second password entry?
It simply does not make sense to me to not have the game password if we do not have all the slots filled and have take over AI on.
CB Droege said:
In addition, if you leave take-over AI turned off, then no civ can ever change players, so if someone wants to quit, their civ becomes AI, and that's the end of it.
I agree with this. I just didnt imagine it would happen all that often.
But yes, it is a needless risk given the alternatives.
CB Droege said:
Finally, the spots should not begin as AI, they should begin as open player spots. If you start them as AI, the AI will found the first city, and start building things, which is not preferable.
Again, I dont see the basis for assuming that we will fill all the spots. I have had this thread running for some time now and we have exactly twelve people so far.
If more want to join they can with the take over AI on. Why hold back the game till we have that 24th person?
CB, you have played this game on multiplayer mode alot more than I have, so I concede that your direct experience is a considerable factor here.
But you have to be able to explain yourself so that it adds up in my mind. Right now, the 'hassle' of a second password is worth it under the options we are taking and I have had two other players tell me that as well, so I know I am not the only one that feels this way.
CB Droege said:
I would recomend not starting the game until you have all the player spots filled. There is no reason to ever have AI in a PTBS game. There are plenty of willing players around. If you want me to help you recruit for this game, let me know.
Sure, CB, please do. I would much prefer to have all the slots filled, and so, I would much appreciate your time and effort in this respect.
Can we do it by Friday morning of the 15th?
richm said:
I have been reading both Arckon and CB Droege and tend to agree with CB that if someone is going to ruin the game it should be easy to recover.That said It won't take long to enter a password. So my stance on this issue is neutral.
OK, rich, I hear you, but would going back 30 turns really be alright with you? And
how many times could it happen? Greifers are nothing if not persistent. With no password protect, that person could log back in while I am at work and recreate their mischeif every day till they are bored with it. That could turn into a mess trying to keep some jerk out of the game each day, constantly restarting simply because we didnt use a game password, How does risking that make sense?
Just knowing that it can happen would make me question whether I would want to keep playing such a game for such a length of time.
If you have ever been at the short end of the greifer stick, it is a very unpleasant thing and their complete lack of ryme or reason for what they do is typical, not exceptional. They do it just because they think that they are making people mad, nothing more; pushing peoples buttons en masse is their motive.
richm said:
I don't think that we must be in a rush to start the game, I realize that we are all eager to get going but waiting a bit will make for a better game.
As for people going away the weekend, if we start on Friday who is going to push the red button for them on Saturday ?
The connection is still timing out.
I dont understand your point here, rich.
It is going to be on a 24 hour timer, right? So it is going to cycle basically one turn per day anyway, right?
That is what I thought we would be doing, anyway.
I was planning on entering one turn per day, myself, so what am I missing here?
I enjoy this type of discussion, and I dont mean to argue, but I simply am not empathizing with the no-password point of view here.
I just dont see it.
