Game Settings Discussion Thread

[DaveShack]

I say yes.

 

[Bowsling]

You changed your mind? Yay!

At present we have 5 people in favour, and 1 who doesn't want to vote either way. And as Yossarian says, we need to get this posted asap if there is a team consensus. I suggest a deadline of 12:00 GMT tomorrow if we get a majority consensus for this suggestion.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Yes, the scenario that Sommerswerd posted (even though it took almost ten minutes to read ) was convincing.

 

[Caledorn]

I'm very glad to hear that, Bowsling! The scenarios he wrote out is exactly along the lines of what I am dead scared of happening as well..

I rewrote Sommerswerds proposal, to make it less "Sommerswerdish" (*cough* I suspect people will see that it's written by Sommer in it's current form ), with Sommers blessing. I was going to post it, but as the game host I should try to stay out of these matters as much as possible. So could someone please post it? Here is my rewrite for easy access if you see it and don't have the time or want to spend the effort rewriting it yourself:

With the 72 hours deadline, here is the Team CFC official position on the current ruleset:

We agree to the current ruleset, as compiled by ruff from several rule suggestions (thanks ruff ), with the exception of the "shuffle" rules (aka 3c, 3d, and 3e) that we wish to remove/replace. The alternatives we suggest for the rules we wish to remove are (pick one):

1. Remove the rules (3c, 3d, 3e) and ask the mapmaker to give every Civ Oil in their Capital, or;

2. Remove the rules (3c, 3d, 3e) and replace them with a single rule clause that simply states "You cannot fully restore a resource improvement the same turn it's been destroyed", or;

3. As a last resort, if these the rules (3c, 3d, 3e) are voted through we ask for this added clause (to effect all the rules as they are written now): "A Team may only ask for a turn order shuffle after first being deprived of a strategic resource for 5 consecutive turns via the second half timer advantage."

 

[Bowsling]

Posted it, very slightly altered to make it clear that I was posting on behalf of the team.

 

[Caledorn]

Posted it, very slightly altered to make it clear that I was posting on behalf of the team.

Thank you

Now the question is whether we need to defend it via posting some of Sommer's scenarios, or if the other teams will see the wisdom of it. It will be interesting to see the reaction from the other teams - particularly RB. We will just have to wait and see.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[Caledorn]

*sigh*

I have been following a PB game thread made by Krill over at the RB site, when I all of a sudden encountered this little tidbit...

Oh, and something else, the "no screenshots" rule is dumb because of one very easy workaround.

WorldBuilderSave files are text files, and everyone has a program to display them graphically, so everyone can easily understand what information is being conveyed. I'm just waiting for someone to clue onto that fact and then royally abuse it

 

[2metraninja]

This specific way of sending precise information about the map falls under the "alternative ways" section where I gave example with the source code of Windows XP being exported legally from USA in 100's of bags full of printed on paper source and then 1000's of volunteers were typing the source back in computers to gather the whole puzzle back again.

There are 100's of ways this rule to be roundabout (sending via morse-code with flash-light, publishing the maps in public printed magazine, so anyone can buy them and sees the map, printing them on paper and then sending them with pigeons, etc, etc other creative or stupid ways), but we are speaking of mature honorable players who do understand and agree to not break a rule, right?

 

[Majic]

I think the whole maptrading discussion is silly, either make a rule saying no mapDISCUSSION is allowed until paper, or allow maptrading completely.

If mapdiscussion is not allowed, there are two options. Either players may only the count tiles from cities or units and share this to agree on settling positions, but not mention terrain or resources or whatever more there is. Or players may not give information by counting tiles nor mentioning terrain or resources or whatever more there is.

If maptrading is allowed, players may do what they want with their map knowledge.

Anything other than those extremes will cause players to find creative/abusive ways of trading map information.

I think trading maps with screenies should be allowed, I dont see any reason it wouldn't be. You still can't trade maps ingame before paper, showing cities and gaining traderoutes or whatever it's useful for.

It's curious that you can pop a hut giving map information way before paper...

 

[Sommerswerd]

Please guys this map stuff is a distraction. The game starts in 1 day. We should be fighting to get the shuffle taken out, or just give up on the shuffle rule (maybe it gets voted out later (by 2/3 majority plus admin consent ) and return our focus to the starting location / overall strategy discussion.

BTW, I think that little ninja edit ruff did to the rules "2/3 majority plus admin consent" is a way for them to nerf espionage later over what they think will be a two-team protest by CFC and German site Those guys are sneaky

 

[Majic]

Nah, its the shuffle or 2/3 majority that are distractions.

 

[Sommerswerd]

You know, that comment made me think of something... I'm a little ashamed I didn't think of it until now because its probably too late

Part of the justification for the nerf on Second Move's resource denial advantage is the nerf of First Move's opening Doublemove advantage. That is a pretty powerful ability that first move has that more than makes up for the resource denial thing. But we took that away, thus nerfing First move and making it less desireable.

It would be better IMO to give opening Doublemove back to First Move. That would get rid of 2 complex rule-blocs and make things alot simpler... Alas, I should have thought of it earlier.

 

[YossarianLives]

So, we have under 15 hours left before r_rolo's deadline to vote on the ruleset, and so far only three of nine teams have voted:

Representing Team CFC and acknowledging the 72 hour deadline, here is the Team CFC official position on the current ruleset:

We agree to the current ruleset, as compiled by ruff from several rule suggestions (thanks ruff), with the exception of the "shuffle" rules (aka 3c, 3d, and 3e) that we wish to remove/replace. The alternatives we suggest...

Apolyton has no objection to the current proposed ruleset, we are eager to start the game.

personal note:...

Spanish apoly also agree with this rules sets and that rolo take the last word on those itmes not resolved

In addition, Yuufo, UCiv's captain, posted that he is on vacation for the next couple weeks and nobody else on his team reads this thread, and GES of RB posted concerns with the 2/3 vote to change rules. Will we be able to start the game if the other teams don't vote on this in the next 15 hours? If so, are the votes currently in favor of the ruleset as is with no changes? Even if r_rolo is given the option to make a ruling on the contentious issues (shuffle rule and 2/3 vote to change rules), I doubt he would make any changes with this little input from the other teams. I hope the other teams post their votes soon.

 

[Caledorn]

So, we have under 15 hours left before r_rolo's deadline to vote on the ruleset, and so far only three of nine teams have voted:

In addition, Yuufo, UCiv's captain, posted that he is on vacation for the next couple weeks and nobody else on his team reads this thread, and GES of RB posted concerns with the 2/3 vote to change rules. Will we be able to start the game if the other teams don't vote on this in the next 15 hours? If so, are the votes currently in favor of the ruleset as is with no changes? Even if r_rolo is given the option to make a ruling on the contentious issues (shuffle rule and 2/3 vote to change rules), I doubt he would make any changes with this little input from the other teams. I hope the other teams post their votes soon.

How can we start the game if the UCiv captain is away for the next couple of weeks, and none from Team UCiv reads these forums?

Could it be an idea to send an email to all the Team EMails about this? Perhaps ask r_rolo1 to do so before making a final ruling on the rulesets?

 

[Caledorn]

You know, that comment made me think of something... I'm a little ashamed I didn't think of it until now because its probably too late

Part of the justification for the nerf on Second Move's resource denial advantage is the nerf of First Move's opening Doublemove advantage. That is a pretty powerful ability that first move has that more than makes up for the resource denial thing. But we took that away, thus nerfing First move and making it less desireable.

It would be better IMO to give opening Doublemove back to First Move. That would get rid of 2 complex rule-blocs and make things alot simpler... Alas, I should have thought of it earlier.

Can't you still suggest this? As it is the ruleset is looking to be implemented with an option for the rules to changed with a 2/3 majority anyways...

 

[YossarianLives]

How can we start the game if the UCiv captain is away for the next couple of weeks, and none from Team UCiv reads these forums?

Hi, this is important!
I am on holiday without Internet access from July 3th till July 17th.
Since Team Uciv hasn't appointed any vice-captain yet, I created a mailbox to allow communication with my team : uciv.isdg2@gmail.com
Should the game actually start before I am back, please inform my teammates by sending an email there.

I edit my sig too.
Bye

He gave us an email address to communicate with their team. It seems that they will be able to take care of playing the turns in his absence. But I'm sure they won't be voting on the rules.

 

[Caledorn]

He gave us an email address to communicate with their team. It seems that they will be able to take care of playing the turns in his absence. But I'm sure they won't be voting on the rules.

Well, then I hope someone from our team can send an email to that address and ask if they have any opinions on the rules and that if they do they should voice them now?

 

[YossarianLives]

Well, then I hope someone from our team can send an email to that address and ask if they have any opinions on the rules and that if they do they should voice them now?

I am about to go into a meeting, but if there are no objections by the time I return (in about one hour), I will send the following message from our team email account.

Greetings Team UniversCiv,
Yuufo has announced that he is on vacation until July 17th, and asked that information be provided to Team UniversCiv through this email account. We wanted to inform you that the game admin, r_rolo1, has set a deadline for all teams to vote on the proposed ruleset by today. This is the current ruleset:

“ISDG 2012 Rules
• Preamble
• Rule Infringing
• In Game Actions (excluding sequential game items)
• In Game Actions (sequential game items)
• Out of Game Actions
• Administration

Preamble
We the undersigned, celebrating the game that is Civ4 and, given the male / female Civ4 ratio is at least 10:1 if not 20:1, have gathered together to play ISDG 2012 in the hope of:
• Impressing the few females that we actually find in Civ4
• Winning the game
• Demonstrating our mastery of Civ4 in all of its aspects
• Testing our interpersonal skills via diplomacy
• Resisting the urge to rule lawyer everyone to death
• Planning to eliminate all other teams and especially savouring the opportunity of causing others to suffer the might of our forces more than once
• And, finally, standing victorious on the broken bones and crushed skulls of our opponents

With these aims, we collectively agree to:
• Play with honour
• Make our mothers proud that they could trust us to 'Be Good'
• Offer respect to the other teams and expect the return of same
Further, we also acknowledge that this preamble is not a rule and is merely a representations of our intent and hopes.


01. Rule Infringing
a. Infringing on the rules is not allowed.

b. When an allegation of rule infringement has been leveled at one or more teams by one or more teams, the game will be paused.

c. Each side of the alleged rule infringement will appoint a spokesperson. 'Prosecutor' for the alleging team or teams, 'Defender' for the alleged rule infringer.

c. Evidence of alleged rule infringement will be collected and forwarded to the Game Admin together with any accompanying explanatory text by the Prosecutor.

d. The Game Admin will forward this information to the Defender and ask for feedback.

e. Upon receiving feedback (or after a reasonable amount of time at the Game Admin's discretion), the Game Admin will rule on the alleged infringement, determine the penalty (if any), the resolution (if any) and those determinations will be acted upon.

f. The Game Admin should start a thread that communicates allegations of rule infringements, parties involved, rule(s) allegedly infringed, evidence of infringement (providing proprietary information is not disclosed) and Game Admin ruling.

g. All rulings under this rule by the Game Admin are final.


02. In Game Actions
a. The following in-game action rules apply at all times.

b. Suicide Training - Knowingly sacrificing a unit to an ally in order to yield experience points to the victorious unit is not allowed.

c. City Gifting - Conquest, culture flip, UN resolution, and AP resolution are the only permitted methods of city transfer.

d. Unit Gifting, Unlock Building - Gifting a unit with experience that would remove the unit experience restriction for the Heroic Epic is not allowed. Gifting a unit with experience that would remove the unit experience restriction for West Point is not allowed.

e. Unit Gifting, war ally support - A team can only gift units to a war ally during the war ally's portion of the turn.

f. Bugs and Exploits - The use of any bug or exploit is not allowed. The decision about exactly what constitutes a bug or exploit rests solely with the admin. Consult with the admin if any action you are considering may be a bug or exploit.

g. In-Game Pausing - Any Team may pause the game. Any team encountering a paused game should consult the CFC based turn-tracker thread. If a team has not requested a pause in that thread, the game may be unpaused.

h. Abusing Pauses - No team should abuse the game pause rule.


03. In Game Actions (war edition)
a. Civilizations that are at war must observe turn order. Turn order is automatically fixed by the APT Mod on the first turn of war.

b. Teams must also observe turn order on the turn immediately prior to the first turn of War.

b1. Declarer Desires First Half Example: If the declarer desires to move first during the war phase turns, they must move before their 'target' in the turn preceding their war declaration.

b2. Declarer Desires Second Half Example: If the declarer desires to move second during the war phase turns, they must move after their 'target' in the war declaration turn.

c. Turn Order Shuffle to later slot - All teams at war have the right to request an order shuffle to a later slot providing at least 3 turns have elapsed since the declaration of war or the last order shuffle. If order requests conflict, the priority for a later position goes to the team that is currently earlier in the turn. The team moving ‘down’ the order acknowledges that they are giving the team moving ‘up’ a double move against them.

d. Turn Order Shuffle to earlier slot – All teams at war have the right to request an order shuffle to an earlier slot providing at least 3 turns have elapsed since the declaration of war or the last order shuffle. If order requests conflict, the priority for an earlier position goes to the team that is currently later in the turn.

e. Turn Order Appeals – A team can appeal to the Game Admin that the shuffle order is unfair and that the Game Admin can adjust the shuffle order at his discretion.

f. Joining an existing war - Teams will exercise care so as to avoid any double move when joining an ally in an existing war.

g. Care should be exercised on the war declaration turn so that the mod can correctly assign war turn order. This means that teams should not leave the game without finishing the turn on the turn that they declare war or the team being declared on should not enter the game until the declarer has finished their turn.

h. Teams can't declare war on a team that is currently online. Teams cannot permanently stay online just to avoid being declared on.


04. Out of Game Actions
a. Team Espionage - All external forms of intelligence gathering against opposing teams are not allowed.
Non-exhaustive list of example: Entering Team Forums, joining multiple teams using different accounts, actively petitioning other players for information, looking around on the CFC (or a 3rd party website) image database for screenshots and save uploads.

b. Game / Pitboss / Save Manipulation or Disruption - Editing the save file (with or without a utility) is not allowed. Intentionally disrupting access to the Pitboss host server is not allowed. Intentionally opening Diplomacy screens and then pausing, intending to lock teams out of playing their turn is not allowed.

c. Pre In-Game Contact - Teams making diplomatic contact before they have met in-game is not allowed. Non-exhaustive list of example: meeting privately to discuss in-game actions, game-related deals, in-game agreements, etc.). Note that teams meeting to discuss rules, ramifications of the impact of votes or rules are allowed.

d. Sharing of Map Images – Map images / screenshots cannot be shared outside of the game until it is possible to share maps in-game.

e. Game Pause Requests - Any team may request a pause by posting in the CFC turn-tracker thread. The purpose of the pause must be included in the pause request.

f. Abusing Pause Requests - No team should abuse the Game Pause Requests rule.


05 - Administration
a. Game Administrator - r_rolo1 has sole authority as game administrator. Replacement of the game administrator must be agreed to by all teams.

b. Victory - The winner of the game is the first team recognized as winner by in-game victory dialog.

c. Defeated Teams - Player on teams that are eliminated are permitted to join another team. These "refugee" players are free to share any information from their old team with their new team. They may NOT engage in team espionage by reporting information on their new team to any other team.

e. Game Setup Votes - Items determined during the voting phase of the game cannot be changed by rules or subsequent team votes. This rule cannot be changed by 05f.

f. Game Rules - Rules (with the exception of 05e) can only be changed by unanimous decision of all remaining teams in the game (1 vote per team) or by admin ruling.

g. Game Reloads - All game reloads will trigger an automatic game pause (game admin will post such in game pause thread) for a minimum of 24 hours or until each team that logged in to the game after the reload point has stated in the game pause thread that they are ready to continue.”

If you have any opinions on the rules, anyone on your team may go to the Ruleset Discussion thread at http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=466 in order to submit your team’s vote. Someone will inform your team at this email address once the game has gone live.

-Team CivFanatics Forum

This includes the changes to rules 5e and 5f that ruff just posted this morning.

 

[YossarianLives]

Email sent. The timing is bad, it only gives them about 20 minutes to vote! But at least they received something.

 

[YossarianLives]

Rules Discussion is closed, and it looks like we are on track to get the game started this weekend!

This means that the shuffle rule never got fixed, but hopefully the scenarios that we fear will not come to pass and everyone will have an enjoyable game without ever invoking the shuffle rule. I know, wishful thinking. I'm just happy the game is starting!

 

[Sommerswerd]

Yes the shuffleboard is a disaster ... May God have mercy on us for allowing such a calamatous rule in the game...

I guess a sign of a good compromise is when every one is equally unhappy with it.

:suicide:

Anyway its over (for now)... on to the next fight