Mistfit
Deity
TY - I understand now...I think
NoAIPatrol=0 ?
- Thread starter Doc Tsiolkovski
- Start date
Guys, in the COTM06-saves thread you can find a utility made by Ainwood. If you run it it'll add the line for you. So if any of you is nervous about changing it yourself, you can use that for conveniance. And simply blame ainwood if it doesn't work. 
DJMGator13
Still breathing
I added it to mine also. Since I have more than 1 copy of C3C loaded on my machine I just modded one and created a "C3C Barb" icon for it. Now I don't have to worry about turnng it on and off depending on which game I'm playing.
This sounds pretty reasonable; I'll add the 'NoAIPatrol=0' line to my conquests.ini file.
grahamiam
In debt to Mr. Geisel
waiting for a response to a pbem game to see if i can make this change permenant. have not started this game yet but will definitely switch it when i do. just not sure if i have to remember to flick it on and off for that pbem game 
(i am last so i will probably effect the barb movement).
i plan to play all further C3C sg's with this setting as well.
(i am last so i will probably effect the barb movement).i plan to play all further C3C sg's with this setting as well.
akots
Poet
Justus II said:
That is surely better be tested, otherwise there is a huge room for various PBEM exploits if this is true. And no way to check it out. It might be worth to avoid playing already started PBEMs with this setting IMO. This basically means editing the ini file every time specifically for GOTM and then editing back for PBEMs.
grs
nameless one
As one of the few or even the only outsider not changing it for cotm06, I just wonder why this gets such an attention as long as we are allowed to use virtually any abuse like ROP raping, ship chaining and free palace jumping. Maybe I just have different prioritie on rules ... 
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
Guess this is something 'new', so people don't have to change their playing style, and give up exploits (by SG rules) they are used to.
Thus, the Barb issue is discussed publically, while the major exploits you name are only brought up from time to time by the "SG Players" (last time it was gozpel IIRC), with the "HoF Community" seemingly not willing to hear about their deeds, or even discuss about dropping those bad habits...
Thus, the Barb issue is discussed publically, while the major exploits you name are only brought up from time to time by the "SG Players" (last time it was gozpel IIRC), with the "HoF Community" seemingly not willing to hear about their deeds, or even discuss about dropping those bad habits
...
Being part of both communities, I think this depends too much on personal taste and playstyle. Things like RoP rape do have an effect within the game itself ie AI who will not sign one with you again. And the AI use it too, so to me it's different from some of the corruption exploits that simply make use of loopholes in the formulae, like the capital on a remote island in the classic game.
Also ship chaining is something that could even happen in RL. Put those ships in different spots and just reload the cargo. Like planes being fuelled in the air.
Another example are the suicide galleys, is that an exploit? To most people it's not, but for for some it is. It does add some extra zest to the game, although my personal luck with this is appalling. Many captains and crew lose their lives when I'm
. 
I personally never use RoP rape, but I do use ship chaining. No doubt that there are people who have those two the other way 'round, or use both, or neither.
Also ship chaining is something that could even happen in RL. Put those ships in different spots and just reload the cargo. Like planes being fuelled in the air.
Another example are the suicide galleys, is that an exploit? To most people it's not, but for for some it is. It does add some extra zest to the game, although my personal luck with this is appalling. Many captains and crew lose their lives when I'm
. I personally never use RoP rape, but I do use ship chaining. No doubt that there are people who have those two the other way 'round, or use both, or neither.
Sandman2003
Prince
I see a difference between the barb issue, being a fixable AI bug, and the "exploits" mentioned by grs above. Whether the exploits should be allowed or not is a seperate issue as to whether improving the AI's barb performance should be encouraged. As to the barb issue, I have added the NoAIpatrol=0 to my conquests ini file, and it will stay that way. As far as the exploits go, while they are legal in GOTM, I will use them. If the ruling on them changes, then I will stop using them, and I won't shed any tears at their passing.
Darkness
Shadow creature
Doc Tsiolkovski said:Guess this is something 'new', so people don't have to change their playing style, and give up exploits (by SG rules) they are used to.
Thus, the Barb issue is discussed publically, while the major exploits you name are only brought up from time to time by the "SG Players" (last time it was gozpel IIRC), with the "HoF Community" seemingly not willing to hear about their deeds, or even discuss about dropping those bad habits
It'd be nice if you'd stop generalizing like this, 'cause I consider myself a member of the 'HoF Community' and I don't do Palace Jumping, Ship Chaining or RoP rape....
The point is those SG rules are self-imposed rules, which kind of end the argument. No offense intended, but why should the SG rules be imposed on the COTM? That sounds like you don't want to play by the COTM's rules, so yoy want the COTM to adopt your rules?
I'm all for playing without these exploits, but that's my choice in my own game.
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
If I would generalize, I wouldn't use " ". That's just to describe what most games in the respective categories consider acceptable.
I for one will always stick to the usual SG rules, simply because I feel better with them. And I see no point in forcing this ruleset to be used for GotMs, simply because there's no reliable way to check for them. A trashed reputation or a razed capital can also happen when you play completely honorable.
"Honor System" and "Competition" are simply two things that don't work together well.
However, I agree wholeheartedly with grs remark about the lack of attention for those "exploits".
grs
nameless one
I was surprised about this unity of "yes, I pledge to increase the difficulty of the zero barbs I will see on this map"-players compared with the lack of interest in other exploits. I agree that honorable SG rules are and will be different from COTM rules.
I disagree that they can't be disallowed by nature of the competition. They are as hard or easy to spot as other exploits that are forbidden. It is just a preference that some things are allowed and others are not, that is no matter of being controllable.
I disagree that they can't be disallowed by nature of the competition. They are as hard or easy to spot as other exploits that are forbidden. It is just a preference that some things are allowed and others are not, that is no matter of being controllable.
As Ainwood has said, we, the staff, run the game for you, the players. The rules have to offer a balance that makes the game attractive for the widest possible audience, covering all skill levels. All rule sets have to be a compromise because we are all different. But if few people agree with them then they'll be ignored, leading to widespread abuse, and/or lots of people will stop playing.
If you want to change specific rules then I suggest you start separate threads to discuss and vote on whether ship chaining or palace jumping or RoP rape or suicide galleys ... should be permitted in the games. I don't imagine you can cover them all in a single thread.
If you want to change specific rules then I suggest you start separate threads to discuss and vote on whether ship chaining or palace jumping or RoP rape or suicide galleys ... should be permitted in the games. I don't imagine you can cover them all in a single thread.
Absolutely! In an SG you are competing against the AI, you have to tie one hand behind your back to give the sucker an even break, and different SGs set different constraints to make that challenge interesting. In G/COTM we are competing and comparing against each other. We need a level playing field for all players, and we just have to decide how high the field should be.grs said:
grs said:As one of the few or even the only outsider not changing it for cotm06, I just wonder why this gets such an attention as long as we are allowed to use virtually any abuse like ROP raping, ship chaining and free palace jumping. Maybe I just have different prioritie on rules ...
Well this is actually fixing a bug inadvertently introduced into C3C in an attempt to change something else (pointless patrolling by AI units, which can slow down the game). With exploits you are talking about stuff that the game allows, but some players find cheesy. Clearly the only exploit that Firaxis thought needed banning was RCP, which they did in C3C.
Personally I use those exploits that I don't find too cheesy like suicide curraghs/galleys and not those that I find to be against the spirit of the game. I don't even use RCP in GOTM. Of course what's cheesy will vary from player to player, so I can live with the current rules.
edit: disregard, replying brought up the thread which is what I wanted.
Abegweit
Anarchist trader
a space oddity said:
I have used ROP rape but never ship chaining. I did do chaining a lot back in CIV I. As I recall, it was taken out in CIV II and came back in CIV III. As such, I have to think that ship chaining might have been an exploit back in the original but that it was restored in CIV III by explicit decision of the programming team. As such it cannot be viewed as an exploit. The reason I don't do it is not because I think it is wrong but because it is horribly tedious.
As for barbs, I think they detract from the game. I forget how they worked in Civ I but in Civ II the proper approach was to ignore them. Then... if they ever seriously threatened one of your cities, you moved all of your units out and let the barbs take it. Next you used a diplomat to bribe it back for some ridiculously tiny amount of money. In Civ III, the proper approach is to make sure that they can't sack the city for anything worthwhile (mainly money). Then you move on.
I have added the appropriate line to my conquests.ini because I want to abide by spirit of the G/C OTM rules. It remains that if I were the CIV God, I would ban barbs (of all types, including Goody Huts). I really dislike random luck, good or bad. I don't think that getting an early settler or a badly-placed barb camp adds anything to the game. On the contrary, it detracts. Happily the GOTM forbids worse things in the same domain, like scientific GLs.
Xerol
Emperor
Actually, it's a boolean flag most likely, so 0 = off and not 0 = on. So you could probably set it to 2 with no problems.
