Is Whip/Chop overflow an Exploit? I say No

[TheMeInTeam]

It's true that people should believe something if they're going to go through the effort to say something. At the same time, I'm not going to "go easy" on someone who resorts to mild name-calling and a resounding "You're wrong!" without any reasons why other than it's how he feels, deep into a discussion with extensive arguments for both sides. He's even telling other posters to deliberately avoid posting potentially useful tactics to the community, and claiming that a legal tactic in every competitive civ IV game format I've ever seen is "100% cheating"! It's not a good post for beginners to read and it certainly doesn't add to the discussion between advanced players.

 

[Kaosprophet]

No, stone with protective walls is definitely the best use of this exploit, you're not lending much credence to your own argument here. Getting 3 gold to 1 is much, much better than 2 to 1.

But is getting 2 to 1 with something you want anyway as a byproduct necessarily worse than getting 3 to 1 on something you could care less about?

Well, of course you get more gold with overflow. That's obvious. But the problem is, you've also chopped a bunch more forests that can't go into anything else

And if I'd chopped them into something else, I'd have done the same thing for a different building. If I split them up between a bunch of buildings, then I've struck an average between 'hurrying' and 'delaying' the buildings.

- so you have a new city with a courthouse, but no granary, monument, etc...
And your workers have been busy here instead of elsewhere.

Which is a wash, because if I chopped into the granary (note: without the 2:1 bonus) then I delayed the monument, courthouse etc. Or if I split the forests, I split the difference. And my workers were still busy here instead of there.

The trick really is best with Pro/stone because you get 3 gold to 1 rather than 2, and most other buildings aren't as cheap so they require more chops just to get to overflow in the first place.

OTOH, most other buildings being considered are things that are (likely) to get built anyway - having a desired building as a byproduct instead of something irrelevant skews things somewhat.
It's only the base-cost issue (ie chops to get to overflow) that gives me pause.

 

[mi6agent]

The game mechanic , which is also Sid's will, didnt allow you , especially in high diffuculty, to keep the slider high, not even saying 100% for a while when REXing . If you are able to do that , without selling tech for AI for money , or have 1123123123 gold mine in your BFC, you are cheating, that simple.
You didnt "help" new player , it like giving a Warcraft 3 noob a map hack and say its cool, use it !
But I do have an advice for new guys out there . Just built cottage nice ,early,in big number , you will get pass Monarch in no time. To pass Emp+ lvl you need a little more than that , find tips
in this forum, but definitely not this one (if you dislike cheating,ofcourse)

 

[Kaosprophet]

Is whipchop overpowering?

If that's the criteria for "exploit," then gifting missionaries to bypass theocracy doesn't count either; on the other hand, building the GLH on an archipelago map might Or playing down two levels with the Incans.

Now, as per one of the definitions of exploit, virtually everything we do in civ could be construed as an exploit if it's good play . So I don't have a problem with "exploits" unless they turn into some kind of unbalancing factor.

My own thought: I don't have a problem with exploits unless they provide the kind of imbalance that will break a game. OTOH, I won't balk at acknowledging something as exploitive just because it's impact is arguably trivial (or alternately, if it's ubiquitous for competitive play at higher levels.)

It's interesting though. The only people you see complaining that these tactics are "unfair" or "exploitative" just based on the perception of being cheap are lower-level players.

Crusher plays Deity with some success, and yet he acknowledged this tactic as an exploit in his first post - though I'll grant that acknowledging is not quite the same as complaining.

For myself, I admit I'm a lower-level player; but again, I merely acknowledge this as an exploit. My only complaint is about those who complain about labeling it as such

 

[nanomage]

wow, so much argument! i even have had completely lost my thought and started thinking whether overflow tricks really make sense or not, although i've used them myself extensively and i think it's the only think that can keep you (or, well, me) afloat at imm.
referring to the OP, i can say, that, on higher level, just everything goes, at least until firaxis guys come and say: "hey, it's a cheat, we're going to fix it in the next patch"
if humans were not exploiting this and many other tricks, they'd play just like AIs and therefore they'd stand no chance over noble.

 

[Crusher1]

First off, I just like to argue just as I like to buy cars and haggle for days. Both are very fun.

(if you dislike cheating,ofcourse)

I despise cheating, cheaters, liars, those who lack integrity, etc. So we think alike in that aspect. We simply disagree when it comes to this exploit. To me, in no way, shape, or form is it cheating. I would consider playing Marathon or using settings such as "no tech brokering" much more exploitive because they change the game much more drastically in favor of humans.

Heck, AIs are dumb and anything you do within the rules can be exploitive. I don't know how many times I have gifted poor cities to AIs for a variety of reasons, all of which benefited me.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The game mechanic , which is also Sid's will, didnt allow you , especially in high diffuculty, to keep the slider high, not even saying 100% for a while when REXing.

Did they intend against 100% slider or not? You seem to point out a number of ways 100% w/o whipchop is attainable, but then that goes against "Sid's will". Which is it? Or are you saying that selling techs and resources for gold is also cheating? You might as well.

You didnt "help" new player , it like giving a Warcraft 3 noob a map hack and say its cool, use it!

Come on, ease off the ignorance. For those of you on the forum who are not aware, WC III is a real-time strategy game, and a map hack in that game lets you see the whole map illegally.

But, the ignorant part of this statement is that map hacks in that game require third party software which is SPECIFICALLY BANNED by the agreement you accept when you go online. It is not part of basic gameplay, and it sure as hell wasn't introduced by Blizzard intentionally (the gold overflow WAS introduced intentionally, as you used to just lose those hammers). Comparing something that is a flagrant violation of rules with something that was intentionally added into the rules makes for a pretty weak argument!

but definitely not this one (if you dislike cheating,ofcourse)

"Cheat" defined, as per dictionary.com:

–verb (used without object)
4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.

Unless you can come up with a credible definition that actually defines overflow as cheating, you're making a false claim. As it stands now, overflow is part of the basic game, needing no modification or rule changes to use - it's available to every civ at game start no matter what. Cheating in gaming context implies a violation of rules, typically. Overflow by definition is NOT cheating.

Any assertion that playing within the rules is cheating is playing pretend.

 

[Kaosprophet]

The game mechanic , which is also Sid's will, didnt allow you , especially in high diffuculty, to keep the slider high, not even saying 100% for a while when REXing . If you are able to do that , without selling tech for AI for money , or have 1123123123 gold mine in your BFC, you are cheating, that simple.

I hope this is satire.

But I do have an advice for new guys out there . Just built cottage nice ,early,in big number , you will get pass Monarch in no time.

Eh, no.
Building cottages is helpful, yes. But it's no good for getting through monarch (or even prince) if you don't know what to do with the commerce. You'll also need to get over the builder's bug, so you don't wind up neglecting your military and getting steamrolled by Monte.

To pass Emp+ lvl you need a little more than that , find tips
in this forum, but definitely not this one (if you dislike cheating,ofcourse)

While I consider this an exploit, I don't consider it 'cheating' any more than I'd consider backstabbing an AI you worked up to friendly "cheating."

 

[DampRain]

If you are able to do that , without selling tech for AI for money , or have 1123123123 gold mine in your BFC

That actually isn't possible, since the gold mines would contribute to commerce in which case it doesn't help maintenance if you have 100% slider . Logic mistake! Maphack in wc3 is totally different as well.

As for overflow, etc. debate, I agree that it's exploitive, but given that the ai gets some freaking ridiculous bonuses (they actually cheat ) it seems just as fair as some of the other ways of improving your win chance.

 

[Guardian_PL]

I've said that before already so I'll make this short - if I can magically move from 21 to 421 way before Writing even so I can fund my REX for 30 turns at 100% it's a one hell of an exploit and who knows, perhaps on Deity I'd feel forced to use it to survive. Luckily I'm an Emperor player and I have no intention using that game mechanic, it feels illogical when used that way. To prevent occasional hammer loss due to overflow - sure, but not deliberate, planned breaking the game.
Don't tell me that if you've done one chopwhip for cash on exp granary you won't do that again in another city. Sure you will! And having more cash from the overflow will let you found more cities, in each of which you'll continue to chopwhip for gold untill run out of forests.
So yeah, it's a gamebreaking exploit in my opinion.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

The problem with "using design oversights" as a definition of exploits is that playing the AI at all essentially becomes an exploit

Really? That stance seems a touch naive.

Fundamentally - yes, you have a human brain where the computer has dice, and unless you choose to exercise that exploit you aren't likely to beat Prince. No disagreement there.

Furthermore, I'll concede that trying to avoid all of the places where the AI is handicapped (not merely stupid, but actually blind) is way more trouble than it is worth. For example, as far as I can tell from reading the code, the AI doesn't even know what map it is playing - not only does the AI not play water maps worth a damn, but it never actually knows that it's in an archipelago.

I don't see overflow as belonging to either of those categories. It's much closer to collateral damage where... I think the most general way to say it is that the product shipped before the implementation demonstrated that they understood how it worked.

(The generous interpretation is that it is closer to the asymmetry of worker theft - being unable to combine "easy" and "right", they went with the former. I can't imagine any argument that would persuade me they weren't ret-conning in a justification, but perhaps I'm too cynical).

That said, it's difficult to claim that your opinion changes my games in any way; the topic is only worth pursuing as far as it is itself entertaining.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

That's true, very little said here will impact the way games are played directly.

Technically, the AI can get overflow too. I'm sure in some rare cases, it occurs, just as the dice might make it play a weak map for it better than normal (as in giving it a land-heavy start in archipelago, or a lot of production on such a map).

At the end of the day though, the AI can only do so much. Overflow tricks are quite balanced in MP IMO, although my experience in civ MP is limited it's enough to know that you can screw yourself by expanding into areas you can't defend, not to mention tech trades are off normally so the whole brokering thing just makes it harder.

 

[nanomage]

^anyway, even if AI occasionally gets overflow, it's negligible for him, while human can feed research and expansion almost exclusively by whipping warriors or whatever.
may be developers did not know what were they doing when they made the overflow thing. but they do not hurry to remove it, so i think it's "sid's will" to (ab)use it.

 

[Dirk1302]

@Crusher, looked at your examples. I'm convinced this tactic can be very strong in the right circumstances:

- Have to have a leader with cheap buildings

- After extreme rex > 10 cities
- And even more recovering from an axe rush
- If you're afraid losing librace, but that's hard to tell in the bc's
In those cases cash can be a lifesaver.

But on deity 6-8 cities is often the limit. In this case researching 100% isn't that important. You'll be ahead in the bc's but this advantage tends to flatten out around ~1 ad after currency/trade. Meanwhile you probably don't have forests left to help chopping wonders/unis and oxford in the future which is not unimportant.

Since it has lots of potential i'd say it's a strong tactic to have in the bag but since it's not gamebreaking i don't consider it an exploit also since you're clearly giving up other things to use it. I'm going to use it myself in the future but the circumstances must be favorable, it's not some always superior technic , just a good one imo. Once currency is in it's not needed anymore i think and i'd specifically use it to get this tech soon.

 

[oyzar]

The problem with "using design oversights" as a definition of exploits is that playing the AI at all essentially becomes an exploit .

Yeah... Who said playing against the AI wasn't an exploit?

 

[popejubal]

But on deity 6-8 cities is often the limit. In this case researching 100% isn't that important. You'll be ahead in the bc's but this advantage tends to flatten out around ~1 ad after currency/trade. Meanwhile you probably don't have forests left to help chopping wonders/unis and oxford in the future which is not unimportant.

Are you saying that 6-8 cities is the limit because of upkeep costs or are you saying that is the limit because you can't get your settlers out fast enough to get more than 6-8 cities?

If it's because you can't get the cities out fast enough, then could you get more cities if you pushed harder on the whip/chop for more Settlers? I really am asking a serious question here since I fall down and get crushed by Deity difficulty - I just can't keep up with the pace.

Of course, if you can't expand beyond 6-8 cities because you get hammered by maintenance costs, then whip/chop gold overflow seems like an obvious solution to the problem.

 

[oyzar]

Mostly it is because of room.. Obviously whip / chop can sometimes allow you to expand a bit more recklessly than you would otherwise crashing rather hard. It is true that you need to pay more attention to economy on deity, but room is still problem more often than not. It is important to figure out when economy is the limiter rather than room however, often you won't have sufficient exploration to know with absolute certainty which one it is. Charlemange is a very synergistic leader this way. Imperialistic to allow you to claim 1-4 more cities than you would otherwise get and pro to carry you the way to col where your super UB managed to save you from economic ruin, then you should have recovered by the time when you reach the gunpowder era where your extra promos help or maybe you rely heavy on EP, not so strange with a lot of courthouses everywhere and cheap castles(as you already have some walls from whip/chop overflow).

 

[TheMeInTeam]

^anyway, even if AI occasionally gets overflow, it's negligible for him, while human can feed research and expansion almost exclusively by whipping warriors or whatever.
may be developers did not know what were they doing when they made the overflow thing. but they do not hurry to remove it, so i think it's "sid's will" to (ab)use it.

My whole point is if you replace "overflow" in your sentence with "trades", "national wonders", or "military units", you can make a nearly identical argument, and yet nobody is calling those things exploitative, even though by definition they are also .

 

[Dirk1302]

Are you saying that 6-8 cities is the limit because of upkeep costs or are you saying that is the limit because you can't get your settlers out fast enough to get more than 6-8 cities?

If it's because you can't get the cities out fast enough, then could you get more cities if you pushed harder on the whip/chop for more Settlers? I really am asking a serious question here since I fall down and get crushed by Deity difficulty - I just can't keep up with the pace.

Of course, if you can't expand beyond 6-8 cities because you get hammered by maintenance costs, then whip/chop gold overflow seems like an obvious solution to the problem.

It has little to do with maintenance, if i could i'd gladly expand to 10+ cities pre 1ad if i can safely do so, even without these overflow tricks you'll catch up somewhere when things come online. Currency's key, once you have it your problems are over. Sure Crusher's trick is a nice way to get there faster.

Problems with expanding on deity come down to 2 things.

1. deity ais expand very fast, it's the only level where they begin with an extra settler. I begin chopping asap, whipping the capital tends to get the first settler out a bit faster but tends to slow you down subsequently unless you have lots of food so this is situational. Rexing is probably the strongest point of my game, i often can get to ~8 cities or even more but not always.Apart from blocking there's a good trick to keep maintenance in check, position the settler on the city site but only build it when the ai's coming with his settlers. You need good scouting to see when they're coming.

2. If there are very aggressive ais around then you have to make sure that you can defend what you build, extreme rexing is just a bad idea in those cases. In that case i often build one or 2 spearhead cities in the direction of the threatening ai preferably on hills not too far from capital and position a defend force between those cities that can reach both cities in 1 turn. You lose the 25% fortify bonus in this case so also fortify 2 units in the cities itself.Make sure you can whip walls when declared on. This'll keep you save until cats, around that time you should be able to do somethings diplo wise.

This situation often leads to smaller early empires. But since your techrate is better it's often possible to take out these aggressive neighbours in the renaissance since they don't tech that well.

 

[nanomage]

^^
^^
yeah, and with other words like units it sounds cool.

i should insert "i agree with TMIT" in my sig