GOTMCivIII Rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whether it help's the poor/good player is irrelevent.My point is that some are re-loading some aren't,so let's make it even and allow re-loading.
This game is meant to be fun for all not just the skilled players.
Therefore the no-reloading rule discriminate's against less skilled players.I don't like the term re-loading I prefer learning.It has been my experience that re-loading turns does not help much overall.The best way to reload is to go back 100-1000 yrs and change some fundamental strategy you started then.An experienced player knows the correct strategy an in-experienced one does not.
And finally I did not compare Ghengis Khan to Civ iii,but to Civ 1.
Maybe Civ 3 should change it's name to American Wild West.Show me a civ that has been warring since yr0 and has conquested the world...It doen't exist,ALL empires founded on Violence collapse.(Romans,Brits and your witnessing the collapse of the American Empire(100 yrs more,tops) with it's High Corruption (like the old Soviet Union,Father/Son presidents)and Huge gap between rich and poor and the squandering of their resources.

mj
 
You are making some big assumptions here, about the collapse of empires etc. I will not comment on that but about this reloading-thing I have to state this: allowing reloading will kill the fun of civ3-gaming. You can try everthing and nothing will have consequences. That's no fun at all!

I agree that a civ that is at war for 4000 years is not realistic, but that's just in this game. Maybe FIRAXIS will make a cultural/peacefull victory/conquest more powerfull in the patch....

ERIKK :D
 
Great Empires are founded by great leaders, they falter and collapse under weak rulers. In Civ3, the leader is you, and you live to be 6050 years old. If Alexander had been immortal, perhaps the whole world would be Greek, who knows. A case could be made that throughout most of history, warlike civilizations expand and thrive until they grow complacent and weak (read non-warlike). It is just human nature to fight for what we want, and when we get it, become less agressive. When a whole civilization is played out in a handful of hours, and the entire population's goals are set by the player, those types of situations aren't going to occur, the civilization keeps its focus.

I don't think games should try to be too real, a bit of fantasy is a good thing. Otherwise you would try to tell your workers to go build a road, and they would just sit there half the time doing nothing. Or more likely, we would all be the workers, and someone would be telling us to go build a road. That wouldn't be a very fun game.

As far as reloading is concerned, no one is keeping you from replaying the game with different strategies. Those games just aren't allowed in the competition. Learning from mistakes is a good thing, then use what you learned to do better in the next game. Imagine your favorite sport with "reloading", would it be any fun to watch, would the games mean anything? Even Shaq would hit 100% of his free throws if he got a do-over every time he missed.
 
Originally posted by marshalljames
This game is meant to be fun for all not just the skilled players.
Therefore the no-reloading rule discriminate's against less skilled players.[/B]

Discrimination - To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit.

This is a game based on accomplishment (merit) on an equal playing field (no reloading) with no reguards to class (you don't get a score based on how good of a player you are, but how you perform on each test).

To drive the point home, without reloading it is a test of SKILL.

With reloading it is a 100 percent test of TIME.

You can say reloading is learning, but in a competition it is cheating. Any time you reload you have advance knowledge which you should not have. The learning process is actually figuring out why things go wrong when they go wrong and learning to identify the situations so that in another game you can recognize what to do. The learning process isn't covering up your mistakes by rampant reloading. If anything that is counterproductive because you find cheating ways to compensate for your bad planning - only cities that get attacked have actual defenders, your offensives always work, you get the huts and prime land first, etc.

Eliezar
 
My opinion is that if you want to learn, replay the game from the start for fun, but not for submission. Learn to play the game without the crutch of reloading.

I am a relative newbie at Civ III (got it for Christmas). The way I learned to play is by starting a lot of games and abandoning most of them after the first age. I made a lot of mistakes, tried a lot of different ways to do things. I estimate about 50 game starts thru the first or second age, and maybe three finished games! My early game is now smooth and polished, but I have a lot to learn about the middle game and end game.

If you want to reload during a regular game that is fine. For the GOTM submission please play by the rules. I'm sure there are cheaters out there, as it is all honor system. However, I think they are only cheating themselves out of becoming better players.
 
Good points. I was distinquishing (in my head anyway) reloading, i.e. one turn back to correct a typo, from restarting, i.e. using advanced knowledge to change an outcome. I still think that re-loading probably does not change a score much, but restarting can make a huge difference since you know so much about the scenario.
 
Originally posted by Eliezar
To drive the point home, without reloading it is a test of SKILL.

With reloading it is a 100 percent test of TIME.
This is basically what it's all about. That's why reloading should never be allowed. Thanks for pointing that out Eliezar. ;)

Well, it's also because you then play the game without knowing the map which is also very important.
 
Well, I do think generalizations are difficult to defend. I know, for example, that when I play golf, no matter how many times I replay a shot, or even a whole round, I don't get a par game. :)

Steve
 
Steve,

This is way off topic, but your golf comment brought this story to mind. You need to play golf the way President Richard Nixon did. Nixon wanted a good golf score. Many casual players count putts as good if they are a few inches from the cup, rather than bothering to knock them in. Nixon stretched this to several feet. For anything less than six feet or so, his playing partners would say, "yes that's good Mr. President," and President Nixon would pick up his ball and mark his scorecard as if he made the short putt. In reality, a lot of short putts are missed, so Nixon lowered his score with this cheat by several shots per round. Betcha he is the type that would reload the GOTM or read all the spoilers then start the game.

Originally posted by graeme
Well, I do think generalizations are difficult to defend. I know, for example, that when I play golf, no matter how many times I replay a shot, or even a whole round, I don't get a par game. :)

Steve
:)
 
Endless poprush with no consequence is a loophole in the game design. So is endless drafting at size 7 with 7+ units of contentment improvement. Neither is realistic, and both offer a high reward wherein the penalty (unhappiness in the city) is defeated and rendered nonexistant by the priority order of the happiness and unhappiness factors. That is, no amount of unhappiness overcomes the contentment factors, so you can endlessly exploit the benefits with no actual penalty.

That's a major flaw in the game, since its exploitation allows the game balance to be thrown out the window, and certain "strategies" rise to the top as too good to pass up.

I think the size 7 factor with workers is also a loophole.

Now I use all three of these myself, the workers the most. I tend not to abuse the poprush, rather to "play normally" with some rushing but then move on in governments and play the game the way it always played in Civ1 and Civ2. Yet I find myself more and more exploiting the draft-rush, and I don't think that's a good thing. It's no better than exploiting the despotic poprush, since both are taking advantage of the faulty happiness priorities. I will probaby cut back on that, or perhaps even eliminate it.

Following the path of least resistance, when it follows a trail down the road of exploitation of game loopholes, is for me a generally self-defeating course of action, which is why I try to avoid it. A game's entertainment value is going to plummet when every game follows the same formula, and the temptations of the exploits become so strong, you find yourself unable to resist them. In that regard, it is wholly like cheating: using some mechanism to defeat the spirit of the game, rather than work to succeed within it.

Yes, there is a certain "hardline competitive edge" (aka Power Gaming) to finding and exploiting every possible flaw in a game design. Yet for all this talk of "reloading = cheat", I haven't seen in this thread yet the mention of "poprush exploit = cheat". That starts to get into a grayer area, no doubt about it, and I'm sure an argument in its defense could be mounted, BUT... I can also mount an argument in favor of the idea, just as the "give away cities" loophole, which has mostly (not entirely) been closed, amounted to a cheat.

I've been participating in the Apolyton "game of the month" equivalent, and avoiding the competition here, because this one seems a little TOO bent toward the scoring system, which offers nothing BUT rewards to the despotic poprush player. It might be interesting to compete with the folks here, to see how quickly I can execute the exploitation strategy and achieve conquest, but I kind of get the same feeling from that sort of gameplay that some of you describe about reloading.

I sincerely hope that Firaxis can work toward plugging some of the game's loopholes without also destroying the good things about the game. That's honestly a very difficult task. Someone here mentioned limiting to one rush per city, and I think that would be most unfortunate. The rush option is a grand addition to the game, and should not (IMO) be removed or rendered useless -- they just need to do something about the player's ability to use it and abuse it at such insignificant cost.


The AI's defense routines also need a lot of work. The AI does not recognize a stack of 20 panzers parked 3 squares from one of its cities as a threat. It is too quick to "spend" its "extra units", and never defends with more than about 4 units in a city. It has no concept of how to use artillery, and only one mode of play for all the civs: expansionist. All it does is try to grab more and more land. It would help with predictability if it had multiple options on hand, multiple priority lists, tactics, unit management. As much AI as there is here, it becomes quite transparent to experienced players, and that's not even counting other game loopholes, such as Right of Passage exploitation, and a diplomatic system with a one-size-fits-all treaty option of 20 turns, which renders most deals useless to the human player. You get rewarded for slimy play (razing cities, starvation of occupied peoples, poprush exploit) and penalized for honorable play (capturing cities, treating occupied people decently, making diplomatic deals, and in the scoring, ALL methods other than ancient warmongering).

This is a really fun game, and it's quite close to being very good, but it still needs a few more tweaks. I sure hope it gets some of them in more patches. So far, my confidence in Firaxis is HIGH, judging from results of their first patch -- and that's no mean feat, impressing me, as I've become highly jaded by the less-than-dedicated results I've seen from other companies.

In the mean time, I've personally been playing lots of "variants", self-restricted scenerios. Someone in this thread mentioned how useful it is to select civs with overpowering ancient UU's. Well what about playing on Emperor/Deity with UNfavorable setups, like civs without such advantages, maps that don't lend as well to ancient victories, self-chosen limitations like limiting poprush or eschewing it altogether, staying in Monarchy governments, limits on brokering, or anything else to vary the flavor of the game, test your skills WITHOUT the easy-out exploits and proven "strategies", introduce new challenges, or just be interesting to try.

One of the reasons I've been drawn to the Apolyton competition is that score is only one of the measuring sticks used there. They give attention to highest score and earliest victory date for EACH victory condition on a map, and that leaves a lot of options open besides just horsie-rush-your-way-to-dominance.

Just a few thoughts from an outside observer.


- Sirian
 
Great Post Sirian,
I had a bad feeling that SOME not all of the high scores were exploiting loopholes in the game.I consider every trick you mentioned to be cheating.Their is obviously rampant cheating going on in this competition making the results meaningless.To bad.Thanks for pointing all those cheats.

mj
 
...avoiding the competition here, because this one seems a little TOO bent toward the scoring system, which offers nothing BUT rewards to the despotic poprush player.

I am sure people use despotic poprush over at Apolyton too. Players just love to exploit loopholes in games because "cheats" like poprushing are usually considered as "tricks" by players. :p ;)


One of the reasons I've been drawn to the Apolyton competition is that score is only one of the measuring sticks used there. They give attention to highest score and earliest victory date for EACH victory condition on a map, and that leaves a lot of options open besides just horsie-rush-your-way-to-dominance.

If you think extra stats & more awards for various type of wins are needed, all you need to do is ask. I am sure we can do that for future GOTMs. This entire GOTM feature was suggested by players and we always welcome suggestions to improve the GOTM. :) If you participated in the Civ2 GOTM, you know the GOTM system is constantly changing to make the ranking more meaningful.

At present time we don't have special scoring formula for the Civ3 GOTM, we most likely will have one in the future since the default Civ3 scoring system does favor early conquest a lot. Feel free to suggest new scoring formulas so we can all discuss them...

Until we have a new scoring system, all I can say is play the game, enjoy the GOTM discussions, and don't take the rankings TOO seriously. The current ranking gives you a general idea of how well you did, but it's nothing absolute. The main objective of GOTM is to have fun, and I think many people do enjoy the GOTM. :king:
 
This is just cut and pasted from an Apolyton post I made a while back. Not all of it would be possible without changes to the program itself (turns of peace). Just a simple change by adding a "well done" modifier to the date bonus would even things out a lot though.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem with scoring isn't so much that early conquest and "bloating" can score so high, its that other ways can't compete. This is because the Bonus awarded for early victory is figured the same regardless of victory type. Of course a space launch/diplomatic/cultural victory isn't going to have a chance to occur in the BC's or early AD's, so the conquest (which usually can be had by then) bonus is usually the biggest. Because the Bonus for winning after about 1000AD becomes negligible, that means that the most points if conquest hasnt been achieved by then will be 2050 scores that have longer to pull up the average (which started at 0 in 4000BC).

The current Bonus formula is (2050 - Date) * Difficulty = Bonus. Difficulty is 1-6, corresponding to Cheiftain-Deity. There needs to be a modifier for each victory condition something like (2050 - Date + VictoryCondition) * Difficulty = Bonus. The number for each victory condition would be the date at which that victory would be considered "well done". If 1500 is used for the space launch VictoryCondition, then a 1500AD Space launch on Regent would get a bonus of 6150, instead of the 1650 bonus it would get with the current scoring system, which is a much more deserving bonus IMO. Map types and Number of Civs would affect the dates that "well done" victories would be achieved, but just general values for VictoryConditions would still improve the scoring system greatly.

Possible values for VictoryCondition:

Space Launch 1500
Domination 500
Conquest 0
Diplomatic 1400
Cultural 1600 (1800 for the 20,000 one city option)

If Modifiers for Map type and Number of Civs needed to be added, they could be added to the formula. Larger maps take longer to complete conquest or domination, and allow for more expansion, thus earlier dates for the other victory types. Smaller maps are just the opposite. Usually water levels and land mass types seem to even themselves out. Archipelago for instance, slows conquest, but also has less room for the other victory types to build on, and keeps Civs from gaining contact with each other as soon, so wouldnt need to be included. The number of Civs usually makes conquest take longer, and makes tech advancement faster (decreasing the time needed for space and diplomatic victories) but makes little difference in Cultural victories. The modifications would just need to be applied to each VictoryCondition, and the formula could remain the same.

VictoryConditions:

Space Launch = 1500 - NumOfCivs*10 - Landmass
- more civs mean faster overall research
- more landmass means more possible population/territory and faster research

Domination = 500 + Landmass
- the bigger the landmass, the more land needed to trigger domination

Conquest = 0 + NumOfCivs*10 + Landmass
- more landmass, more civs, more to conquer

Diplomatic = 1400 - NumOfCivs*10 - Landmass
- more civs, more land, faster fission can be researched

Cultural(100,000 total) = 1600 - NumOfCivs*2 - Landmass
- more land to build culture cities on
- more civs, faster research for new cultural buildings though less chance at cultural wonders

Cultural(20,000 city) = 1800 + NumOfCivs*10
- more civs, less chance at cultural from wonders

Landmass:

Huge = 300
Large = 100
Standard = 0
Small = -100
Tiny = -300

Of course, most of this is just off the top of my head, especially the landmass values. Certainly all the values could use a lot of fine tuning... just a scoring system that takes all of this into account (not just score by date and territory/population) would be nice. A side bonus for each wonder built (I usually dont build any, because it lowers scoring efficiency, best to just conquer them as it is now), turns of peace, and future techs could also be added. I know future techs are already in the scoring system, but with there being 540 turns in a game, and usually future techs are only going to count for 100 of them at most, they get "averaged" into insignificance. A seperate, non-averaged bonus would give them some meaning, and reward those who go the scientific route, rather than just doing enough to get the advances needed for a specific victory.
 
From the GOTM4 Spoiler thread.

So maybe you can explain to me, Aeson, how you come to draw your line at "going to use all the resources available to me", and justify these exploits, which you admit are exploits, and not be tempted to cross the line into reloading? I accept you at your word that you don't reload, but isn't the line there awfully thin? Can something be "just a little bit" wrong?

The only real difference is what is allowed in the competition rules. An exploit becomes a cheat when it is against the rules. For purposes of competition, the only real prerequisite is that there is a level playing feild. I don't use any exploit that hasn't been addressed and determined to be allowed. This way everyone knows where the line is, and can adjust their gameplay accordingly. I don't worry about my Civ3 "soul", it's IRL morality and honor that matter, in the game what is legal is legal.

I understand where you are coming from Sirian, as it is the approach I always take to multiplayer type games. In head to head games, where there is interaction between players, then an IRL code of conduct needs to be adopted. In a single player environment though, enjoyment is the only morality. The GOTM falls somewhere inbetween, as there isn't any direct interaction between the players, but still a comparison between them. For one person to use a tactic or exploit that isn't available to another, it ruins the comparison.

Pop-rushing, razing cities, breaking treaties and starting wars are all horrendous acts in real life, but on the screen it's just a game. I agree that there aren't any real costs involved in these types of actions in the game, and thus they are too powerful.
 
There's one real problem about calling an exploit a cheat and thus disallowing it for the GOTM: you're on a smooth scale. Some exploits can easily be called a cheat, while others are very controversial. Then it's very hard to draw a line.

Also, I don't want to put all players in a bodice while playing the GOTM.
 
Then fine if you allow exploitsThen it should specifically state in the rules that exploits are allowed,what these exploits are and "how to".
Furthermore because new exploits will be discovered,if you use a new exploit(un-known to the rules)you must report it,otherwise your cheating.
 
I'm trying to make a list of all the exploits there are for Civ3, so that it can be clear for everyone what is and what isn't allowed. I suggest what's green is allowed and what's red is disallowed. I like to have this list be ready before the GOTM V starts.

1: Right of Passage abuse.
To make an agreement of Right of Passage, move your units to their main cities and attack them all at once.
2: Woker factories.
I have no idea.
3: Drafting at size 7 cities.
Drafting doesn't cost population when it's done in a size 7 city.
4: City-trading trick.
Capture an enemy city (far outside your region) and sell it with high profits to a third party. Useful when you're gonna loose the city anyway.
5: Pop-rushing.
In despotism, give your cities a high food production and rush build units. The production of units will go much faster than through normal production.
6: Bombard anywhere.
Hold down "b" if you want to bombard and you can bombard anywhere you like.
7: Reloading.
Reload to get a better prestation. Or start all over.
8: Read the spoiler thread.
Read the spoiler thread to get foreknowledge.

Please correct me where the explanation is incorrect as I have used almost none of those expoits (like the worker factories ;)). And did I mis anything?
 
Worker factories???
Are these those cities you use only for building workers (or settlers - settler factories)? I don't see this as an exploit.

Also, pop-russhing and ROP abuse are actions (rules) the game allow you to do in exchange of some disadvantages (unhappines, bad reputation, etc). I don't see them as exploits either.

BTW, was this drafting at size 7 reported to firaxis? This, as the bombard everywhere, are terrible bugs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom