[moved] Exploit discussion

[tommynt]

Moderator Action: Moved from Banned Exploits - Question & Answers as that is not the place for extend dissusion. Brief question only.

As long as you don't engage in a repeated pattern of trade\war and the war is a real war then there shouldn't be an issue.

can u explain in any rational way why something you call an exploit havent been "fixed" in like 2 years, 1 expansion and several patches?

So many things got changed and fixed but a game mechanic being there since hour one of civ5 should be an exploit, an unintended design problem?
Doesnt make any sense to me.

Seems to me more like you want players all play in same (your) way.

 

[vexing]

there are rules to give everyone a level playing field.
the rationale behind those rules is irrelevant.

 

[Genghis.Khan]

Well, Rules MUST to be Rational.

How would you feel if you were sentenced to life imprisionment for Robbery and somoene only gets 2 years in jail for Murder?

In this case, yes is different, but still... Rules have to be Rational

 

[Moriarte]

Using RAs is a much more significant exploit i can think of. One can win in 220 turns while producing only a margin of science needed to complete the spaceship, while going with just one city. And you get like 100k of beakers by investing only a small amount of gold. How powerful is that compared to 1k gold stolen during first 100 turns?

Besides, if you start down a path of war loans you can forget about RAs (and trade) mostly, so, in my opinion, this is more or less a self balancing aspect of game design. I am pretty sure one can finish space ship sub 200 turns with this tactic or without it.

And given the nature of HoF play, where people restart 50 times to get favorable starting spot, the concept of cheating becomes somewhat blurry..

I do respect the fact that this is Civfanatics and some people are more aware than myself, but, nevertheless, i would like to add this opinion.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

there are rules to give everyone a level playing field.

Yes, that is usually the reason for good rules.

The rules for Civ V however are largely unenforceable (must be manually checked, if they can be checked at all which I doubt). This results in rules that not everyone may be complying with.

The real problem with the Civ V HoF rules is players must recognize and avoid the banned exploits. If the players don't understand every banned exploit, we can hardly blame them for unknowingly benefitting from them.

the rationale behind those rules is irrelevant.

You have lost me here. Rules always need a rationale to be relevant.

The best rules are those enforced by the game itself. The rationale is game balance.

None of the banned exploits are prevented by the game. As such they should not be banned, because compliance is too hard to monitor, assuming it can be monitored at all.

This is the main reason I don't play Civ V anymore. The other reason is Civ V has very poor game balance and is far too easy to win (there's no challenge in winning versus the very poor AIs).

Banning dozens of exploits does nothing to fix these fundamental flaws in Civ V. Civ V HoF should accept Civ V the way it really is.

On the other hand, I'm not sure any of this will make sense, given that the game has no technical means of preventing cheating, both intentional and innocent.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Tabarnak]

Only a strong mod can get rid of AI sells/loans(then immediately DoW and sell/loan again with another civ), barb pillaging(preventing to sell the lux again for 30-X turns left assuming standard speed) and all other ''exploits''. All we need for now is to wait. Rest is only speculations.

 

[vexing]

You have lost me here. Rules always need a rationale to be relevant.

most of the HoF rules are arbitrary, eg no social policy saving, no checking "no barbarians", only era ancient starts, no dlc. since the HoF is run for the benefit of others at the expense of dennis et al, it's completely their prerogative to have made those arbitrary rules. if you want to set up your own competitions without rules or with your own set of rules, feel free to do so.

 

[tommynt]

I sadly havent gotten an answer to my question yet.

Whatever, I see that u call thing now "rules" instead of "banned exploit", and that does make way more sense to me. Maybe you should rephrase the rules (and also this tread) as that.

Every1 can make up his rules for "his" game, on other hand calling things exploit in a PC game should be somehow rational and argued well as its just such a bad word, being close to cheat. And things being in game are clearly no cheats as long as someone doesnt ban them out of nowhere in his own rules.

Overal u talk way to much about the things listed as rules(exploits) are like gerneral concsense when they infact are just made up in some1s mind

 

[Salomo]

most of the HoF rules are arbitrary, eg no social policy saving, no checking "no barbarians", only era ancient starts, no dlc. since the HoF is run for the benefit of others at the expense of dennis et al, it's completely their prerogative to have made those arbitrary rules. if you want to set up your own competitions without rules or with your own set of rules, feel free to do so.

Says one bum to the other, "If the salvation army spits in the soup they give you, its their perogative to do so. If you don't like it, go cook your own soup."

Sure it is. But wouldn't it be better if they didn't spit in the soup?

 

[Salomo]

Using RAs is a much more significant exploit i can think of. ....

I fully agree. As long as we have this arbitrary list of "exploits", we should add RAs to the list of exploits and see how the game levels with those that can't be bothered to calculate and plan RAs