Mazer Rackham
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 86
Leif wrote
Please do, because I always played GOTM according HOF rules..., naively I thought they were the same.
Not that it will help me beating Tommynt or DaveMcW
Same here.
Exploits and AI Abuse
- Thread starter Tabarnak
- Start date
Same here.
The problem is that "fair" is something totaly different for everyone.
In HoF for example its not banned to abuse the courthouse bug giving you HUGE advantage (3 and more happy faces).
Others think that RAs are a unfair advantage and brokken mechanic (I kind of agree) and just play without - while some think that maximising their outcome via median pushing is good play.
Where to draw the line?
HoF totaly screwed it up by accepting bug abuses while trying to force people into playing some special way.
Dont have to let this GOTM here go down same way
How do you abuse the courthouse?
If you want to expand and conquer then you need the courthouse otherwise you won't be able to expand at all. At the lower levels it won't hurt but I'm playing a King game now and it hard to keep my happiness into green. With the policy you get for each courthouse +3 only when the city has enough pop to give you that happiness. So it can grow 3 pop more, not that big abuse then the big gold abuse where it makes a huge difference.
Gamewizard
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,234
I think that taking lump sums of gold from the AI should be banned and only allow per turn gold.
no offence meant, mate... but yeh know, ofcourse people are doing small 'exploits'. its niave to think otherwise.
im with Tommynt for the most part. most things are fair game.
'If some1 want play without war - let him do so
If some1 want play without RAs - let him do so
If some1 want play without trading with AIs - let him do so
Doesnt mean I have to do same'
spot, F word, on.
however, serious exploits like the oxford are not to be encouraged. and something does need done about the 'trade everything for gold and declare' trick. some kind of war weariness (which the game badly does need) would help.
Moderator Action: This bit was unnecessary. I linked above the exploits that are not allowed in Civ4. It will be hard to have a discussion such as this if we go after people personally instead of logically presenting our own side of the discussion.
Remember in Civ2 we could rush caravans to a city to help build a wonder? those were the days....
nothing is ever perfect people, nothing in life is ever prefect. nothing. let alone some computer game.
but hey, what does it matter now or anymore? Skyrim is out!
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
There is no purpose to the GOTM if everyone is playing with a different ruleset.
This problem has increased with each new edition of Civ. In part because of the ever sloppier programming, but also because of a clear shift in mentality.
This problem has increased with each new edition of Civ. In part because of the ever sloppier programming, but also because of a clear shift in mentality.
the game itself got a clear ruleset - doesnt it?
changing it d be like saying - hey lets play poker but 4 aces doesn't count now - sure you can still play poker - but some will stop playing this new poker - just because there is no reason to 4 asses suck suddenly.
Moderator Action: Please watch your language as we are trying to run a family friendly site. It is getting tiresome.
There are different poker rules, not?
It could be the same with Civ?
Moderator Action: Please watch the quotation inappropriate language
U know that you cant build Oxford multiple times just like that?
You have to do special stuff (loosing the Oxford city?!) to abuse, also even the building discription itself says "built only once". Thats like playing poker with cards in your trousers.
So obvioulsy for every human with a brain you cant compare abusing a bug with normal gameplay stuff. This courthouse thing is boarderline same imo - you get unwanted adavantage by building it but not to built it d give you disadvantage.
But some act like inbuilt normal core gameplay stuff (RAs, trading) ... is like cheating
I don't see why a courthouse would give you unwanted advantage?
I want the extra happiness.
Every building gives you an advantage, if you don't build it you don't get it.
You can only build it when you conquer, that is true but without that building you can't conquer. So yes, it gives you an advantage if you conquer instead of just creating new cities. But you have to work for it, it's harder to conquer then to just build cities. So you earned it. The courthouse is not unbalanced.
Monthar
Deity
1. Building the courthouse means you're trading the advantage of faster policies for more happiness.
2. Building courthouse is a core game-play item, so by saying it gives unfair advantage you're lumping yourself in with those "HOF idiots".
Seems to me you are having difficulty defining what an exploit is versus what is good game play. Earlier in the thread, you said:
If the developers didn't fix the Oxford bug, does that mean they meant for it to stay in the game? I do not think so, and thus it is an exploit.
In this way, the same goes for trading GPT for Gold and then declaring war to get back your GPT back. It costs you nothing to create a gain for yourself. There is no cost in game terms to achieve your gain. To me, this is a greater exploit than the Oxford bug because with Oxford, you must at least give up a city.
The Courthouse "bug" you speak about is clearly a game mechanic. You get happiness for building it, just as in Civ4 you get reduced maintenance for building it. There is a cost to build it and a benefit you gain from building it.
killerloop
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2003
- Messages
- 170
reading all new stuff I guess we need to get back to the real question again:
Do we want to have comparable games in TSG GOTM?
if yes, then
either play to HoF rules, that seems to work fine there
or
either play with no rules, any "exploit" is ok, and we don't have to define exploits in this case...
Do we want to have comparable games in TSG GOTM?
if yes, then
either play to HoF rules, that seems to work fine there
or
either play with no rules, any "exploit" is ok, and we don't have to define exploits in this case...
Sry Leif I really dont want be attacking or so here, but some1 can only write this post when he get few game knowledge, its just wrong and that not an opinion but a fact:
1. Building a wonder (guess it would work with other nationals aswell) multiple times which says in description "built once" is a bug
2. Courthouse not only gives you 4 happyness as writtin in its discrition but gives you even more happyness - thats a bug aswell - still building courthouses might not be bug abuse as you d not get the initial and wanted benefit if you dont build it
3. Declaring War to get your G/t is NOTwithout costs like you make it up - former friendly civs well usually go into gaurded mode, making lot future deals very hard and to bad conditions only.
Even worse - strong civs espacially on harder lvls might never accept peace again.
And even more worse even civs you didnt make war with will mark you as warmonger.
So you trade a short term gain vs a long term problematic Diplo situation.
Thats a gameplay decision.
I m just stating facts here as they seem to have gotten lost in this discussion thread.
What about this?
A barbarian appears and it is one one of my resource.
I know it will pillage it next turn.
I sell everything I have including this resource and GPT for Gold.
Next turn the trade is broken and I have +2000 gold for nothing.
Imho this is an exploit. But you can say it is not, it is in the game.
A barbarian appears and it is one one of my resource.
I know it will pillage it next turn.
I sell everything I have including this resource and GPT for Gold.
Next turn the trade is broken and I have +2000 gold for nothing.
Imho this is an exploit. But you can say it is not, it is in the game.
Thank you for this. Now I have something to test. As I have never played this way, it will be interesting to see the result.
Have others experienced this?
If tommy is correct, and there is a longer term resistance to ai trading in future?
Normally, I would consider this ai abuse though.
Monthar
Deity
No, it's not a bug. The courthouse is removing the
unhappiness, which is higher per citizen in that city than in a city you built. This is exactly what the courthouse is supposed to do. Nowhere in the description does it say it adds 4 happiness. In fact the only 4 listed is the maintenance cost which is 4 
.Some folks have falsely claimed that building the courthouse removes per city unhappiness from that city. However, if you pay attention to your happiness levels before annexing that city you'll find that it's the act of annexing the city that removes the 3 points of unhappiness per city from that city not the buying/building of a courthouse in that city.
Therefore if anything should be banned it should be annexing the city, not building the courthouses.
actually if barbs pillage the last res you have got from this kind the deal itself still goes on (for the gpt part). But you neither get the Diplo penatly for not giving away the res anymore. You only get the diplo penalty if you break the deal by DoWing. At least I think so (not 100% sure). The only profit you gain by barb pillage is that you can resell or reuse the res once you have killed the barb and repaired the resource.
But honestly - making up like you d get 2000 gold for nothing is just plain overdoing it - ais never got beyond 300 gold normaly (apart later game when all barbs are dead anyway) and normaly aswell they are even more brokke. So even if u sell the res for 150 gold (some medium price) you gain only that much gold if u can resell it later for same price. And you loose the resource tiles (production and gold) as long as the barb is in your land and untill worker reworked (so you loose worker turns aswell).
So the net gain of barb pillaging if you want "abuse it" (its way to rnd anyway imo) is pretty slim.
No, it's not a bug. The courthouse is removing the
Some folks have falsely claimed that building the courthouse removes per city unhappiness from that city. However, if you pay attention to your happiness levels before annexing that city you'll find that it's the act of annexing the city that removes the 3 points of unhappiness per city from that city not the buying/building of a courthouse in that city.
Therefore if anything should be banned it should be annexing the city, not building the courthouses.
Nope it is the courthouse fault then.
When you annex a city, you get -5 unhappiness for you city instead of 3. When you build the courthouse the -5 is gone instead of going to -3. Is this a bug or intended from the creators?
