DISCUSSION: * Renaming units & cities

Rik Meleet

Top predator
Retired Moderator
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
11,981
Location
Nijmegen Netherlands
Teams are starting to discuss within their own private fora whether the renaming of units and cities are allowed or not. And if so, under what conditions.

Let's first check the rules on renaming:
The Rules said:
2.4 - Misleading through Renaming

Description: No team or individual is permitted to rename a unit or city with the intent of misleading or confusing opponents.

Definition: Cities can be renamed to names of tech or sums of gold or anything else in an effort to not trade what that opponent agreed to. Units can be renamed to other units and appear to be something else entirely.

Purpose: To prevent the misleading or confusion of another team through malicious use of in-game features.

Verdict: Using this 'feature' or any other feature or exploit that allows misleading or confusing another team is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once – Red (5-Expulsion and forfeiture of double what was not legally traded)
This only talks about renaming units & cities to get creative tradedeals. It doesn't talk about renaming cities or units in a normal way.

So; to start the discussions:
1 - What do the teams think about being allowed to rename a city as often as the team that owns the city likes ??
2 - What do the teams think about under which conditions a unit can be renamed? (standard PBEM good conduct is to keep units identifyable for unit-type).
3a - Does a renamed city or unit have to have a "renamed"-identifier in its name ?
3b - If so, must that identifier display the previous name ?

Any other thoughts on this ?
 
These are personal opinions only.

1. As long as the intent is not to confuse other teams, I don't see any reason to limit it.

2. Again, as long as the intent is not to confuse other teams, why not? Unit type needs to be identifiable, and we don't want to disrupt battle reporting, but otherwise I see no reason not to rename units.

3. Shouldn't need a "renamed" identifier, nor the previous name.

Additional suggestion:

We could have each team send a record of renames to the admins, and if any team has a question about another team's rename they can send the question to the admins, who can sort it out. This way neither the renaming team nor the team who sees the rename needs to reveal knowledge the other teams might not have.

Another suggestion:

In the interest of good sportsmanship, I don't think teams should be allowed to do renames with the purpose of offending another team. For example we should not allow team 3 to capture a team 4 city and rename it "loserville" or something worse.
 
This opinion is not personal and represents full or partial consensus on this matter by Team MIA, I am posting as a UN rep- not an indvidual

1 - What do the teams think about being allowed to rename a city as often as the team that owns the city likes ??

MIA is against city renaming for various reasons, including for the sake of a smooth discussion process, regarding plans such as using the city as a landmark in exploration, or using the city in a trade route, among other uses. We feel that there is one exception: conquest, where the original name will be in brackets. In cases where the 23 charecter limit prohibits this, we feel that the teams should still attempt to make some indication of a previous name. {for example "Istanbul (Constantinople)" Could Become "Istanbul (Constntinopl)"} Name Calling should be prohibited in the re-naming of cities (i.e. no "Team MIA Stinks! (Athens)"

2 - What do the teams think about under which conditions a unit can be renamed? (standard PBEM good conduct is to keep units identifyable for unit-type).

Units should retain their normal name/Class – but you can add anything else a team would like. (ie "Worker – OurSlave1" or "Warrior – CapitalDefence3")
Units should NOT be allowed to change their names once named.

Except when being upgraded and then only their class would change

Spearman - Fred would change to Pikeman - Fred when upgraded

3a - Does a renamed city or unit have to have a "renamed"-identifier in its name ?

no, the city name in brackets serves as an identifier (i.e. no need for "Istanbul (r.n.-Constantinople)"
 
I prefer to allow citys to be renamed. Renaming things is a civilizations right, Don't take that away from us. to quote my freind Hex "If its in the game...." (he created this saying while lagging my computer by giving me heaps of location bleps which he new froze my computer while simutanouly attacking me in aoe2
 
Well, it's my personal opinion that renaming your units (only once) and cities (as often as you want) is okay. However, naming a city "The Wheel" and trying to pass it off as the technology or naming a group of swords "Warrior" is against the rules. Of course, if any team has trouble figuring out what's in a stack, they have the right to ask the stack's owner what's in it, a perfect reason to ask for an extension.

Ginger_Ale might have his own interpretation/feelings, so I'll see what he posts before we make an official ruling.
 
This only talks about renaming units & cities to get creative tradedeals. It doesn't talk about renaming cities or units in a normal way.

@rik -we're not "normal"

we have minimal objections to renaming cities (anything anyone wants to rename after a famous idiot or stooge is okay by us)

the misleading dogpoop is a :nono:

I think the timer for activation of the trickery clause would be after diplomacy is initiated.
If two civs never met, this clause is void and irrelevant. Except for the case where city names changes to send messages to other civs. For example to a ship sailing by.

We're idiots and can't understand big words. WTF does this mean?
 
How do you know it has not been seen ...

land unit with more than one movement point or a naval unit or even an aerial unit ... all these can pop in and have a good look around and then disappear again ...
 
Provolution, those 15 Mounted Warriors on your doorstep might not give you a chance to enter into any agreements. Sorry for the spam. On topic, I dont have any preference on city/unit renaming since any trickery would easily be spotted by the higher powers.
 
Sorry now your comments are totally unrelated to the thread topic ... I was simply pointing out scenarios where a city's name may be viewed by a team without the owner being aware ...

So please stop spamming the thread !!!
 
the simple people of TeamKISS have designated the more talkative of us to speak formally in future diplomacies. however, being anarchists, we're too disorganized to limit discussion when not in formal negotiations. therefore we present a worst case scenario to open discussion - active stupid people with long memories. :)

Having little sense of etiquette, we've been renaming right and left (both cities and units) Except for our 4 horse SOD, we don't have stacks out so nobody will feel threatened. our intent is not to deceive and trick our way to the top. Our cities are renamed in keeping with the choices of our stupid people. They will not be intentionally renamed after building (so sayeth the complete idiot - yo kiss take notes) we'll also watch what we do with the units.

Igor wishes to associate himself with the posts of ybbor, regentman, daveshack, fe3333au, nobody, killercane and GA (long time no see, what's up?) a special thanks to tim for explaining things to us. By extension these comments will become part of our simple lore.

BTW our horseman are out of :beer: anybody else got some ponies to get together for a :band: SoD?
 
Top Bottom