A cheat-proof GOTM?

[LowtherCastle]

I was wondering if it would be conceivable to set up a GOTM so that instead of downloading the save, we only got to access the game through the internet, upload our moves and then see the next turn from the internet?

Not only would this make re-loading impossible, it would also make it a lot more difficult (but still conceivable with multiple users) to 'look' at the map before playing.

I've never played multi-player, is that how it works?

 

[da_Vinci]

I was wondering if it would be conceivable to set up a GOTM so that instead of downloading the save, we only got to access the game through the internet, upload our moves and then see the next turn from the internet?

Not only would this make re-loading impossible, it would also make it a lot more difficult (but still conceivable with multiple users) to 'look' at the map before playing.

I've never played multi-player, is that how it works?

I have recently been playing some pitboss games, have not tried to save the pitboss game so I can't say if the game is living on my computer, or if it just lives on the host and displays on my computer. For your plan to work, the server would have to be hosting the game, and the clients would have to be unable to generate the save files, merely be display units.

I will ask my pitboss opponents if the game can be saved by clients.

dV

 

[LowtherCastle]

I have recently been playing some pitboss games

What's a pitboss game?

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about--the server hosting the game. You described it perfectly.

 

[da_Vinci]

What's a pitboss game?

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about--the server hosting the game. You described it perfectly.

I asked one of the players ... he thought that the game could be admin password protected, so that even if you can save the file, you can't play it without a password on your own machine. I will do some more asking.

Pitboss is interesting ... you play against humans ... eveyone plays one turn every 24 hours, there is a site called civstats that gives game data and who has played that turn for games that are connected to it, for quick reference. It also allows inter-player messaging.

Maybe some of the GOTM heavy hitters should square off against each other mano a mano

dV

 

[BLubmuz]

I think the HoF mod is more than enough to avoid reloading.
Everything is tracked, you can't escape.

Moderator Action: Paragraph deleted

Anyway, since this is a friendly competition, i don't think it's worth the effort.

 

[da_Vinci]

I expect the post above to be redacted as soon as the mods find it

dV

 

[Lexad]

If the person hadn't arrived at this idea on his own, it won't help him much then
Sorry for offtop.

Pitboss actually discriminates people with no/bad/expensive connect and does not add much to the safety comparing to mod

Moderator Action: Deleted .

Leaving it as is seems OK IMO.

 

[LowtherCastle]

Leaving it as is seems OK IMO.

I didn't mean for this thread to be taken as a criticism of the existing GOTM system. I'm fine with it too.

Just something that has been lurking in the back of mind for a long time.

 

[da_Vinci]

If the person hadn't arrived at this idea on his own, it won't help him much then

You are ruthless!

dV

 

[LowtherCastle]

You are ruthless!

Truth can be brutal.

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

[da_Vinci]

Truth can be brutal.

Don't shoot the messenger.

No guns involved! I was commending Lexad for his ruthlessness!

dV

 

[Balbes]

Yes, the only reliable method for cheat-proofing is to have the game run on a centralized server. But this is not supported in Civ4 for single-player games. I can imagine that the developers didn't really see Civ4 as a competitive sport.

 

[LowtherCastle]

Yes, the only reliable method for cheat-proofing is to have the game run on a centralized server. But this is not supported in Civ4 for single-player games. I can imagine that the developers didn't really see Civ4 as a competitive sport.

That's interesting. Btw, did you mean competitive or cut-throat?​

Nah, LtC, too late. All your internal organ are belong to us, hahaha.

 

[Smirk]

You could probably use the PBEM aspects to have a centrally secure game, and just have the data parsed by the server instead of the opponent. I am only guessing though, it could be unworkable depending on what you have access to modify.

A question about bringing the gameplay to a central concept is how will you handle the AI and its choices which vary greatly from player to player. And in fact can be the biggest differentiating factor in many games.

 

[LowtherCastle]

A question about bringing the gameplay to a central concept is how will you handle the AI and its choices which vary greatly from player to player. And in fact can be the biggest differentiating factor in many games.

That's interesting. Does it really make any difference when you send a set of parameters to the program? Presumably, the only difference would be the parameters you sent, right?

 

[AlanH]

While it's technically interesting to speculate about a server-based GOTM, I really can't see it happening. Firstly, no system on earth is totally secure, and we are not about to invent the first such system here. But even if we did, how many players would be prepared to be online all the time they play a GOTM? And where do you anticipate we would find the programming resources to develop and maintain such a custom, secure server solution, and the hardware and bandwidth to run it?

I recommend that you focus your attention on ensuring that new players are treated to a combination of peer pressure, and good examples set by regular players, rather than trying to devise a totally cheat-proof system. Just by having this discussion, you run the danger of exploring and exposing new options for cheating.

Managing cheats is the least enjoyable part of the GOTM Staff work by a very long way, and if it becomes a significant part of our day then the GOTMs will simply cease to exist, because there will be no Staff left who are prepared to run them.

 

[LowtherCastle]

I see your point. Feel free to delete this thread. For me it was mostly idle curiousity, so if it does harm at best, better to just get rid of it.

 

[da_Vinci]

I see your point. Feel free to delete this thread. For me it was mostly idle curiousity, so if it does harm at best, better to just get rid of it.

As the other major contributor to this thread, I second LC's motion for its deletion, if it is deemed on balance to be detrimental.

dV