Civ IV Ethics

[Sisiutil]

There seems to be an unwritten code of ethics for Civilization players. This is especially visible on this board, where certain tactics often get dismissed as "exploits" or even "cheating". There seem to be certain practices that are regarded as "dishonourable"; even game features like slavery and chopping forests for production--both of which are not entirely unrealistic--fall into this category for some players.

So what is that makes a specific tactic an "exploit" to you, something you just refuse to do even though it's part of the game in some way? Is it achieving an advantage vis-a-vis the AI that a human player would never allow? If that's the case, doesn't that make war an exploit, since it's widely agreed the AI is not much good at it?

I'm just looking to stir up some discussion. Or trouble. Same difference.

 

[dh_epic]

To me, an exploit is when you constantly take advantage of an AI blindspot. A blindspot is different from overall inadequacy. The AI can basically handle most attacks, even if not very well. But if you found that the AI were just terrible at dealing with catapults, and you found yourself building 90% catapults, you'd be in exploit territory.

I can't say that an exploit is something I wouldn't use. I'd say an exploit is something you eventually HAVE to use at a high difficulty. It's something you also hope that Firaxis will eventually close.

To some degree, I think an early choke is an exploit. Seems like that's always the best strategy -- to scare the workers behind city walls, and let the economic advantage bring you ahead.

 

[Nicci]

The AI has loads of advantages to a human player. I can't see anything as an exploit. certanly not things like slavery or chopping down forrests.

 

[Commander Bello]

First of all, in my eyes there is a significant difference between "cheating" and making use of an "exploit".

Cheating for me is to discover the world via the Worldbuilder and / or to give you some additional units.

In this way, you get an advantage which is not justified by the game rules, in which way you ever put it.

An exploit for instance would be to put some bombers in a neutral nation's cities, with which your enemy doesn't have open borders. This allows you to bomb your enemy into obliteration, and the AI has proven not to be able to cope with this.
Nevertheless, it is a valid strategy, as the game rules allow for it.
Very near to an exploit is concentrating your research on expansive technologies which you know the AI will not research that early.

Nevertheless, as long as we are talking about single player games, I face no problems with people using either cheats or exploits. The bomber exploit or the rare technology way is used by myself occasionally. So what? I don't harm anyone by doing so, do I?
Personally, I would never uncover the world via the Worldbuilder, but some people have fun by doing so. Once again, if they do so in SP games, why not? It is their game.

As soon as we are talking about MP games, demo games or something in that area, things look different. Obviously, cheats are completely out of discussion.
In MP games, the players should have defined whether and which kind of exploits are allowed.

 

[Flak]

As far as single player games go, anything that makes the game fun for the owner is their business. As far as multiplayer games go, everybody should normally agree to standards before they start the game. As long as that happens, whatever rules they decide to play by are their business, as long as the game is fun for them and they all abide by the same rules.

It's interesting that you mention slavery. Because of my own personal ethics, I never use the civic of slavery. I also never expand on Judism. If I'm the one who happens to 'found' this religion, it never gets a building of any kind and I delete the missionary thus never allowing that religion to spread. Ofcourse that only applies when I play the vanilla version of Civ IV. I've now modded the game so much that those 'features' are irrelevant.

The ability to mod this game so easily is one one thing I really love about Civ IV.

 

[vilemerchant]

Because of my own personal ethics, I never use the civic of slavery. I also never expand on Judism. If I'm the one who happens to 'found' this religion, it never gets a building of any kind and I delete the missionary thus never allowing that religion to spread.

Post of the year ROFL.

 

[Nicci]

not sure what's wrong with judaism, but even if Fascism would be the 'right' thing to do game-wise, i would never consider using it.

 

[Commander Bello]

not sure what's wrong with judaism, but even if Fascism would be the 'right' thing to do game-wise, i would never consider using it.

I think Flak referred to the fact that Jews do not proselytize.

 

[dh_epic]

I never work pigs tiles, because eating pigs is an abomination in the eyes of God.

 

[Tristan_C]

I also never expand on Judism. If I'm the one who happens to 'found' this religion, it never gets a building of any kind and I delete the missionary thus never allowing that religion to spread.

I built Hollywood in my last game. The computer recommended a Jewish Temple as the city's next civic improvement. I swear it's true. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing. Computers have a unique sense of humor.

 

[jimbob27]

Using the Romans feels like an exploit. I bump up the difficulty by 2 levels if I want to play with them.

 

[NKVD]

Post of the year ROFL.

I agree...

but his games must be dull...no wars ever...

 

[microbe]

Taking advantage of AI inadequacy is the way you win the game, so I don't think that should be a line to define exploits.

To me exploits are that you play the game in ways not intended by the game designer.

 

[necrolyte]

I built Hollywood in my last game. The computer recommended a Jewish Temple as the city's next civic improvement. I swear it's true. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing. Computers have a unique sense of humor.

And when you're done w/ith that, does it suggest that you build a Bank? Because then your computer's not funny, its just racist.

 

[Dionysius]

And when you're done w/ith that, does it suggest that you build a Bank? Because then your computer's not funny, its just racist.

Ku Klux Klan Komputer, eh?

 

[Mozza]

I never use the civic of slavery on moral grounds. I will still research Fascism, even if I don't use Police State, it's good to know thy enemy.

 

[vilemerchant]

I find it incredible that people find clicking a slavery button 'immoral' but at the same time don't mind deleting jews, starting wars, burning cities to the ground etc. It's just a GAME huh!

 

[BenniusCaesar]

Well i guess in the technical definition of the word 'exploit' I do exploit the AI going for the techs I know it won't go for.

But can someone offer a tip how else you would ever take over them scientifically? It takes them less points to research techs, so if you went along the same track as them you would always stay behind.

So you have to research the ones you know they won't in order to trade for the ones they do.

 

[gdgrimm]

I generally consider something an 'exploit' if it's something that takes advantage of a game mechanic that really exists because of a 'bug' or a exists only because of the game implementations.

There also needs to be an element of 'the only reason I'm doing this is to take advantage of it'. That's something that each person has to answer for themselves, since it's impossible to prove why a person did what they did.

A couple of examples:

Pop rushing something, and then using the overflow on a Wonder.

Not exploit -- I really want the thing I pop rushed finished, and also really want to build the Wonder. And I won't wait until the thing is just about finished to maximize the overflow.

Exploit -- I believe it was in an ACL game where it was suggested to build a Monument to within 2 hammers of completion (even though the leader was Creative), so that later it could be pop rushed finished to apply the overflow to the Oracle.

Partially improving tiles, then stopping, then finishing them later.

Not exploit -- you stop the improvement to run away from Barbs, or because a new tech has been found whose improvement is more important, or because you've changed your mind and decided to do something else with the workers, etc., etc., etc.

Exploit -- chopping a bunch of forests to within 1 turn of completion, knowing full well that you're doing this to later rush chop something.

 

[T.A JONES]

Its referred to as 'Civ'alry and its essential for practicing in a game like Civ3, that can still be enjoyable if your following it and not ramming AI up the arse with old tricks that lead to a million point/gold and possibley killing intrest in the process

. Civ4 has handcuffed some aspects to delete many expliot opportunities. Good and bad I think