Is the prebuild an exploit?

[Jason Fliegel]

The thread title says it all. For those who aren't aware, a pre-build is when you don't have the technology to build a certain building (often a wonder), but you know you soon will. So you start building something else (often a palace), then switch to the new building when it becomes available. This gives you a huge jump on production. For example, if you've got 20 turns left until you research literacy, you might start building a palace that will take 24 turns to complete. On turn 21, when you've discovered literacy, you switch to the Great Library and suddenly, you're very close to having it completed.

I've always considered pre-building to be an exploit. Sure, sometimes it's unavoidable -- maybe you lose a wonder race, so you switch to a second-best wonder, or maybe war gets decalred, so you switch your library build to a barracks build. But to start a building fully knowing that you're going to switch production before it gets completed seems a little exploitative.

If I'm remembering right, you lost half your shields if you did this in CivII. On the other hand, the Game of the Month page doesn't list this as an exploit (and they have a number of exploits that are recognized as exploits but still permitted, like the free palace jump, or ring city placement).

What do the rest of you think?

 

[Dell19]

I guess its exploitative since its taking advantage of how the game works but it doesn't guarentee a win like other exploits and it would also be difficult to avoid as it would be hard to find a city that hadn't made some progress in building something when you decide to swap to a wonder...

 

[biggamer132]

Perhaps you will find solace in this saying: "All's fair in love and war". Besides, competition for wonders can often lead to war, so the maxim holds true.

 

[homeyg]

The AI uses in a sense if they don't win the race to one wonder and they change to build their next priority wonder.

 

[Jason Fliegel]

The AI uses in a sense if they don't win the race to one wonder and they change to build their next priority wonder.

True, but even I don't consider losing a wonder race and not abandoning the shields to be an exploit. For my money, it's only an exploit if you set up the initial build order thinking "I'm not going to complete this building/unit/wonder." To me, an unforeseen change of plans isn't the same as a pre-build.

 

[biggamer132]

True, but even I don't consider losing a wonder race and not abandoning the shields to be an exploit. For my money, it's only an exploit if you set up the initial build order thinking "I'm not going to complete this building/unit/wonder." To me, an unforeseen change of plans isn't the same as a pre-build.

I don't really understand how doing something to increase speed and efficiency in a game can be morally wrong. After all, sometimes a pre-build is required to compete in a wonder race with other civilizations.

 

[Halcyon]

If pre-building is exploitative, then so is building wonders above Monarch, more often than not. You try beating a Deity AI to Sun Tzu's while starting from level pegging. Unless the dimwits start building it in their size two tundra island oil-securing town, then you'll be in for a tough time.

 

[Jason Fliegel]

I don't really understand how doing something to increase speed and efficiency in a game can be morally wrong. After all, sometimes a pre-build is required to compete in a wonder race with other civilizations.

Really? A pre-build is required to compete in a wonder race with the good old "irrigate-the-grasslands" AI?

I don't mean to imply that using an exploit is morally wrong. There's a list of exploits here, and many of us use some of these. I personally have been known to abuse a ROP agreement or two in my time, and if I weren't playing C3C, might consider using Ring City Placement. No judgment whatsoever -- it's just that for me personally, pre-builds (or, more specifically, palace-to-wonder pre-builds) violate the spirit of the game, and I was curious to see if others agreed.

 

[Dell19]

Because you are using knowledge that technically you shouldn't have by startig to build something else so that you can switch to a particular wonder when you research it and its another thing that the AI cannot specifically do but then you reach the point that essentially any good tactic can be seen as an exploit... Just exploits that are acceptable.

 

[Arathorn]

I have no problem with prebuilds. I see the collection of shields as more of an abstract accumulation of goods/money towards a certain project. Once all of the "stuff" is in place, the actual building of a building (even a Great Wonder) can be completed fairly quickly. The shields invested are, to me, showing how much bankroll (in a very abstract sense) has been dedicated so far to a project. Changing the project doesn't change the bankroll -- at least, not in the general case.

This makes a lot of things make sense for me...
- Leader-rushing? The charisma of the leader (whichever type, depending on version) raises public opinion and gets lots of time/energy/money/whatever donated from the general population that is normally used for something else. Thus, whatever he wants completed, gets fully funded immediately.
- Civil Engineers in C3C make sense -- they raise money for civil projects but that money (those stored shields) "disappears" if the project is changed away from a civil improvement (building). Makes sense.
- Changing projects is easy -- we just rename the slush fund -- oh, wait, the govt. decided it didn't need a library but that we needed knights instead. Oh well -- that's the govt. for you.

I have no problem with the prebuild -- I know what I'm building -- I'm just lying to the general public for a bit to get their support more easily and not have my funds thrown away into another project.


Arathorn

 

[Jason Fliegel]

If pre-building is exploitative, then so is building wonders above Monarch, more often than not. You try beating a Deity AI to Sun Tzu's while starting from level pegging. Unless the dimwits start building it in their size two tundra island oil-securing town, then you'll be in for a tough time.

Good point. I was thinking in the context of my own games, which are Regent-level. Although part of the reason* I don't play the higher levels is because I don't want to have to rely on particular techniques to keep up. The beauty of Regent is that its flexible -- a single mistake won't kill you, and you can shift gears mid-game and still have a chance to win.

*0.001%. 99.999% of the reason I don't play on higher levels is because I would lose.

 

[dze27]

No, not in my books.

An exploit is something that is within the rules, but outside the spirit of the rules, and I don't think this counts. Priorities change all the time for governments. It's a pretty subtle difference that you mention about "intentions". Intentions change all the time in the game. I think of exploits as something that the game designers would say, darn, we didn't mean it so that you could do that, the rules should have been different. I don't feel that is the case with prebuilds.

Compare shield production to tech research -- you can't "prebuild" science. Your research can't be switched to something else. The game designers were surely aware of the prebuild strategy and left it in on purpose. I agree with Arathorn's point about shield production representing the accumulation of resources towards a project.

Is it an exploit to prebuild for a granary in your first city while you're working on Pottery? Or just for wonders?

It would certainly be an advance for the AI if they could effectively use prebuilds too. There'd be a lot of cursing from us human players but it could be programmed. All you need is an estimate of when you get your required tech and how many turns it would take a given city to gather that many shields.

No question, though, it is a very powerful tactic. Right up there with using stacks of Artillery on the list of massive advantages we have over the AI.

If Civ is getting too easy with prebuilds, move up a level

 

[kane77077]

Yes, yes, yes - it is definitely an exploit.

(But I do it anyway.)

 

[Gogf]

I agree with Arathorn. Also, if the AI can build a wonder in 10% of the time it takes a human (as they can on the higher levels), they would be impossible for humans to build without prebuilds.

 

[Dell19]

It all comes down to what you think 'exploit' actually means...

 

[kane77077]

The difference between having to switch production for one wonder to another and beginning a palace you never have an intention of completing is a big one. In many (non-computer) role-playing games, participants must keep seperated "player's knowledge" and "character's knowledge". This is slightly similar. You citizens have no way of knowing that if they could only master the technology of Monarchy, they'd be able to build a marvel of such magnitude as the Hanging Gardens, so setting production to "palace" in one of your cities as a placeholder (just to accumulate shields) is an exploit in my opinion. The AI players don't do it. They do, however, switch from one wonder to another - so that's not an exploit in my opinion (I don't consider that a "pre-build".)

That said, I (again) confess that I do it because it makes the game a bit easier. Also, enforcement of any policy that outlawed "pre-builds" as an exploit would be hard to do. How can you know if that player really meant to finish the colosseum and just changed his mind as a new wonder became available? It can't be known what a player intended, so I think that it is impossible to enfore any such rule. This sounds kinda corny, but here it is : Let your conscience be your guide. If you must use that tactic to win and you're okay with yourself for doing it, use it.
I you don't need it to win

move up a level

 

[dojoboy]

No, I don't believe its an exploit because its in line w/ all other types of GW production. For the palace prebuild to be an exploit, then so would cascading GWs (when a GW is built, if possible, one switches to another GW). You'd have to ban switching from one GW to another GW, if the first is missed out on. This would be extremely frustrating for the majority of players.

 

[bluebox]

kane had a very important point: if you consider the point of view of the *role* you are playing it is likely to be an exploit. i've never seen it that way, but............
i think, practically, it is a help to beat the ai. and i don't feel guilty about the ai. i like the 'academical' approach of some of the top players that lead to a broad knowledge base with entries like rcp, mass upgrade, prebuilds, ...... maybe you could make a whole tech tree out of that! prebuilds are a technique to handle 60% ai building costs on deity.

remember, no cheats were left in the code. that's good because we don't have these 'if you type in ......' announcements, here. rather discuss exploits, much more interesting

 

[Rammstein]

If I hadn't that option, I'd kill myself (in the game, not IRL). Not because I lag behind so much, which I don't, but because I simply don't want to wait that long for certain wonders. One wonder I always make sure to pre-build for is Theory of Evolution.

 

[t3h_m013]

i would say that cascade is defo not a eploit. may be an exploit when its a deliberate prebuild like some people have said. i think it would be good to loose some (maybe half is ott) shields when you change... maybe only certain e.g. loose some shields for buildings, not units. civ4 idea maybe?