Question about reloading.

[Spoonwood]

I've just started looking into the C/GOTM here. I started playing one of the C/GOTM (I don't want this to qualify as a "spoiler", so I won't say which yet). I kept a notebook with me to write down events and an approximate timeline for the QSC/up to 1000 B.C.E. I would often write down what I planned to due before I did it. Twice it happened that I wrote down what I planned to do, didn't do one key important step, and then noticed my capital in civil disorder since I didn't do what I wrote on the page when I thought I had. I reloaded from the autosave twice making the exact same moves (even with new knowledge) as I did before, and changing one move to follow exactly what I had written on the page. I would like to submit and get in on the May forum if I can and I haven't broken ettiquette too badly. Don't worry, I doubt I'll score near the top, as I know I've made PLENTY of other mistakes/weak plays already. Should I submit my QSC/1000 B.C.E. save? Once I finish it, should I submit my completed game? Or will I have cheated due to my stupidity of not following what I wrote down? Also... I did "retire" right after the 1000 B.C.E. save. This, of course, reveals the entire map. Does "retiring", and then playing again qualify as cheating? If I need to put this message elsewhere, please tell me. Thanks in advance.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Both are fatal to a fair submission, IMO. Once you know the map, you know way too much for fair play. Reloading is also a no-no, unless you had to due to technical issues. As far as cities going into disorder, you might want a helper program, such as MapStat or CivAssist 2 to give you advance notice. They aren't perfect, but they can sure save some headaches. If you do submit, make sure that you post what you did in the appropriate spoiler thread and possibly you might get mercy.

 

[AlanH]

I've just started looking into the C/GOTM here. I started playing one of the C/GOTM (I don't want this to qualify as a "spoiler", so I won't say which yet). I kept a notebook with me to write down events and an approximate timeline for the QSC/up to 1000 B.C.E. I would often write down what I planned to due before I did it. Twice it happened that I wrote down what I planned to do, didn't do one key important step, and then noticed my capital in civil disorder since I didn't do what I wrote on the page when I thought I had. I reloaded from the autosave twice making the exact same moves (even with new knowledge) as I did before, and changing one move to follow exactly what I had written on the page. I would like to submit and get in on the May forum if I can and I haven't broken ettiquette too badly. Don't worry, I doubt I'll score near the top, as I know I've made PLENTY of other mistakes/weak plays already. Should I submit my QSC/1000 B.C.E. save? Once I finish it, should I submit my completed game? Or will I have cheated due to my stupidity of not following what I wrote down? Also... I did "retire" right after the 1000 B.C.E. save. This, of course, reveals the entire map. Does "retiring", and then playing again qualify as cheating? If I need to put this message elsewhere, please tell me. Thanks in advance.

Sorry. All of the above actions are considered cheating. The rules are absolutely clear: you must not reload and replay any situaiton in order the change an outcome, decision or action. Your QSC and your final entry are both invalid submissions based on what you have said you have done. Mercy is not an option. We have a zero tolerance attitude to reloading.

 

[Spoonwood]

I did read the part about reloading in the rules section. I thought there existed a possibility that since my reloads happened only to execution (as opposed to decision) mistakes it might constitute an exception. Unfortuantely, I saw nothing about retiring. Maybe I missed it.

 

[Spoonwood]

Oh... and don't worry... I haven't submitted anything.

 

[AlanH]

... since my reloads happened only to execution (as opposed to decision) mistakes

How would you suggest we could tell the difference?

Unfortunately, I saw nothing about retiring. Maybe I missed it.

Well, retirement is a decision you take. Reloading to reverse that decision is .... reloading!

 

[Spoonwood]

How would you suggest we could tell the difference?

True enough that I don't know how you would tell the difference, so it makes sense to completeley outlaw reloading. But, I thought I may as well ask.

Well, retirement is a decision you take. Reloading to reverse that decision is .... reloading!

I don't quite see these as equivalent. If one reloads one has knowledge of at least one future turn in the game. If one retires, one doesn't have future knowledge of the game... one only has a *general* idea of what the entire map looks like and what other civs have done, as one can retire on a turn and then loaded it as a regular saved game on that turn. The quality and amount of knowledge gained from reloading compared to retiring does differ (depending on several factors). Reloading involves retracing a step and basically rewriting the past. Retiring only gives you knowledge about the present. But, I can easily see why retiring qualifies as cheating, since it gives you knowledge the game doesn't regularly give you (which I take as the point). Still, looking back over the code of conduct, I didn't find this in

"You may not reload the game from any previous save file or an autosave file, including the Start file, in order to replay and change any events that occur in the game. Reloading gives you an artificial knowledge of future events and might allow you to manipulate the outcomes of some random events, but these behaviors will often leave a distinctive signature on your game that can be detected by further review of your submitted save game files" or in the known exploits.

I wish I would have found the "no retiring" rule somewhere.

 

[ainwood]

Well, "retiring" then starting again is covered under :

"You may not reload the game from any previous save file or an autosave file, including the Start file.

 

[AlanH]

Reloading involves retracing a step and basically rewriting the past. Retiring only gives you knowledge about the present. But, I can easily see why retiring qualifies as cheating, since it gives you knowledge the game doesn't regularly give you (which I take as the point). Still, looking back over the code of conduct, I didn't find this in

You are being disingenuous, to say the least! If we had to spell out every possible separate instance in which reloading is illegal w would have to write a book, and no one would read it.

Your action is described precisely in: "You may not reload ... in order to replay and change any events that occur in the game. " Retirement was an event that occurred in the game. You reloaded to replay and change it.

There is one simple underlying principle to all our rules about reloading, spoilers and such, which is to prevent players from playing with advance knowledge of *any* feature of the game. On this basis, it should be absolutely obvious that retiring to see the whole map is illegal. It tells you which techs you need to reach the rest of the world, it tells you where the other civs are, it tells you how big the world is for the purposes of domination planning .... That's way more information than you typically get from a single turn reload, and yet a single turn reload is also illegal.

 

[Spoonwood]

You are being disingenuous, to say the least! If we had to spell out every possible separate instance in which reloading is illegal w would have to write a book, and no one would read it.

Your action is described precisely in: "You may not reload ... in order to replay and change any events that occur in the game. " Retirement was an event that occurred in the game. You reloaded to replay and change it.

There is one simple underlying principle to all our rules about reloading, spoilers and such, which is to prevent players from playing with advance knowledge of *any* feature of the game. On this basis, it should be absolutely obvious that retiring to see the whole map is illegal. It tells you which techs you need to reach the rest of the world, it tells you where the other civs are, it tells you how big the world is for the purposes of domination planning .... That's way more information than you typically get from a single turn reload, and yet a single turn reload is also illegal.

Simply put, I didn't act disingenuously. Looking around the web, I found that reloading due to an execution error, as opposed to a decision error, came as accepted by the realms beyond civ tournaments. Then again, they did play differently. Second, the viewing of the map in the retirement screen does NOT occur in the game, as if you retire you no longer play the game after you've retired. You can merely see the map *until* when you stopped doing something and see what happened in the game *at a general level*. Maybe one can guess land terrain accurately to some degree from the retiring screen. But, you simply can't see where resources lie, where barbarians have placed encampments, and other sorts of information you get from playing the game forward a few turns. Seriously, viewing the map from the retirement screen doesn't come as covered explicitly. I don't see how adding it to the rules would hurt that much. And also, try and recognize that some people ALWAYS would or have retired their civ games when leaving the computer screen. Why? Well, in civ I and civ II that's the only way one saw the histograph, unless the game ended.

I suppose you can consider retirement as an event in the game in a sense, but I didn't think of that way before and I realize why now. IF retirement consists of an event in the game, then stopping the game consists of an event in the game, because one stops playing the game while still in the game. Consequently, then one RELOADS a game anytime one does NOT play a game straight through at one sitting. This would mean that every game saved and loaded at some point qualifies as reloaded.

The viewing of the retirement map doesn't consist of advance (in time) knowledge, since it ONLY gives you knowledge up to the present time. However, it does consist of *extra* knowledge in space, so again, I can see why it qualifies as cheating and I don't mean to argue for it. I only pointed it out as a different type of knowledge than reloading. Retiring doesn't necessarily tell you which techs you need to reach the rest of the world. Even if we have a "star map" with an island extremely far away one might get there by a suicide curragh/galley/carrack/caravel run. It certainly can qualify as more information than a single turn reload in some respects. However, it won't give you more *local* information than from a single turn reload. Really... I think the whole playing by the rules thing for civ has to end up relying on nothing but an honor system.

 

[AlanH]

Simply put, I didn't act disingenuously. Looking around the web, I found that reloading due to an execution error, as opposed to a decision error, came as accepted by the realms beyond civ tournaments. Then again, they did play differently.

A different competition. As you say, they play to a different set of rules.

Second, the viewing of the map in the retirement screen does NOT occur in the game, as if you retire you no longer play the game after you've retired. You can merely see the map *until* when you stopped doing something and see what happened in the game *at a general level*. Maybe one can guess land terrain accurately to some degree from the retiring screen. But, you simply can't see where resources lie, where barbarians have placed encampments, and other sorts of information you get from playing the game forward a few turns. Seriously, viewing the map from the retirement screen doesn't come as covered explicitly.

Are you saying that it is NOT covered by the explicit rule about not replaying a decision or event?

I don't see how adding it to the rules would hurt that much.

What decision are you going to ask us to add explicitly next?

And also, try and recognize that some people ALWAYS would or have retired their civ games when leaving the computer screen. Why? Well, in civ I and civ II that's the only way one saw the histograph, unless the game ended.

A different game, with different rules.

I suppose you can consider retirement as an event in the game in a sense, but I didn't think of that way before and I realize why now. IF retirement consists of an event in the game, then stopping the game consists of an event in the game, because one stops playing the game while still in the game. Consequently, then one RELOADS a game anytime one does NOT play a game straight through at one sitting. This would mean that every game saved and loaded at some point qualifies as reloaded.

Flawed logic. Saving and quitting the game, and then reloading that save and continuing does not change any decision or event that occurred.

The viewing of the retirement map doesn't consist of advance (in time) knowledge, since it ONLY gives you knowledge up to the present time. However, it does consist of *extra* knowledge in space, so again, I can see why it qualifies as cheating and I don't mean to argue for it. I only pointed it out as a different type of knowledge than reloading. Retiring doesn't necessarily tell you which techs you need to reach the rest of the world. Even if we have a "star map" with an island extremely far away one might get there by a suicide curragh/galley/carrack/caravel run.

So fire me! I didn't include the word "safely". And being able to reach other places by suicide run is entirely different from being able to get there with troops en masse. You have additional information.

It certainly can qualify as more information than a single turn reload in some respects. However, it won't give you more *local* information than from a single turn reload.

Why are you distinguishing "local" information vs. substantial world informaiton?

Really... I think the whole playing by the rules thing for civ has to end up relying on nothing but an honor system.

Absolutely. Which is why I am trying to ensure that players understand the underlying principle behind the rules, and don't feel they should be allowed to get away with things just because the written rules don't explicitly forbid them.

 

[Spoonwood]

A different competition. As you say, they play to a different set of rules.

Hence the question.

Are you saying that it is NOT covered by the explicit rule about not replaying a decision or event?

Yes. Check the part about loading/reloading a saved game.

What decision are you going to ask us to add explicitly next?

I don't know if I will even have any more or have any interest in these sorts of games at a competitive level.

A different game, with different rules.

Flawed logic. Saving and quitting the game, and then reloading that save and continuing does not change any decision or event that occurred.

Actually it well could in a certain way, although I don't know if it could in this way with a Civ game. There exist random factors in the game, which could or do happen according to a random number generator. The random number generator could base itself paritally off the chronometer on the computer. Consequently, making the same move at 9:30 on Tuesday could have a different effect than a move at 11:30 on Thursday. Although, again, I don't know if any civ works this way. Also, saving and quitting the game does change decisions and consequently events that occur, because one's concentration, memory, attention, etc. works differently if one plays over a set of intervals rather than all at once. Lastly, quitting the game consists of an event in the game. Quitting and reloading the save thus produces a different set of events than continuing to play. But again, quitting and saving doesn't give you *extra* information like retiring does.


So fire me! I didn't include the word "safely". And being able to reach other places by suicide run is entirely different from being able to get there with troops en masse. You have additional information.

Perhaps usually, but not necessarily. Let's say you have a seafaring civilization (no Great Lighthouse) and the following pattern between two islands: coast square, sea square, two ocean squares, a sea square, and then a coast square. If one moves one's galley/dromon off the coast into the sea square no suicide mission takes place. If one moves into the first ocean square, again, no suicide mission takes place. As soon as one moves into the second ocean, one has a suicide run going on. But, as long as one reaches the other island's sea square and DOES not sink, one can transport masses of troops to the other island. How so? One uses two galleys/dromon. The first galley/dromon moves two square from the coast, so it ends up in the first ocean square. It then waits. Meanwhile, the other galley/dromon moves from the new island coast two squares into the ocean next to the other galley/dromon. It then waits. The dromon/galley nearest the original island then transports its troops to the other dromon/galley. Both ships still have two moves left, so both move back to the coasts and don't capsize/drown. Of course, other variations on the same idea can happen, even with non-seafaring tribes.. such as one ocean square between the islands, where the galley from the first/older island always moves to the ocean square, while the galley from the new island always moves only out to sea. Of course, with the Great Lighthouse one could use sea squares like the coast and effectively transport masses of troops over a distance of five ocean squares with a seafaring civlization (the older island galley/dromon moves over three ocean squares, while the newer one moves over two ocean squares and always returns to sea). Dots of sea squares that appear in the middle of an ocean can also make variations on this. So, in principle, even on a star map with lands vastly separted by wide stretches of water and many ocean squares, given the Great Lightouse and dots of sea squares in that big ocean, one might successfully move masses of troops using multiple hand-offs using multiple dromons/galleys. The last example seems silly for sure, but I've used the hand-off method with a few units before to some effect. *SPOILER ALERT*... Actually, I think I first figured it out myself (many others I suspect do this on some maps) on the "land of plenty" map.

Why are you distinguishing "local" information vs. substantial world informaiton?

Local information helps some... or perhaps me, to focus on in-game goals. Also, I wouldn't consider minor tribes aka barbarians as substantial in the world picture. But, they definitely do matter locally in some games... especially for players not use to dealing with them.

Absolutely. Which is why I am trying to ensure that players understand the underlying principle behind the rules, and don't feel they should be allowed to get away with things just because the written rules don't explicitly forbid them.

Yeah... and the principle seems that one can't use any extra information one would have than if one had *theoretically* played the game at one sitting. I get it... it makes sense. I just didn't think it got clearly expressed.

 

[FacuK]

@ AlanH,

The first time I started a COTM, when I finished my session I chose the "retirement" option instead of "quit game", as I had usually done in Epic Games (although I never like seeing the world map). When I saw the map screen, I thought that was cheating, so after that I just quit the game (I started play COTM before the "Submit your retirement game" option was implemented, and because I seldom have time to finish a COTM I didn't submit that game).

I never thought of retirement as a game decision, but a way to stop playing. I always thought that a rule or comment about use the "quit game" instead of "retirement" was needed, especially for the newbies.

I understand you can not list all the situations that are forbidden or not (and you are right that this is covert by the no reload rule), I only want to say that Doug.Lefelhocz is not the only that made this mistake.

Anyway, all of you make a great job with the GOTM's.

 

[AlanH]

I never thought of retirement as a game decision, but a way to stop playing.

I guess I just don't understand English. Retirement is one of the biggest decisions you take in real life!

I give in. I'll add a specific statement.

 

[FacuK]

I guess I just don't understand English. Retirement is one of the biggest decisions you take in real life!

Well, I don't know you, but for sure I don't understand English very well. You must have mercy of we, no native English speaking!

 

[Paul#42]

I give in. I'll add a specific statement.

Thanks guys. We needed that extra rule.
I guess the staff was bored anyway.

 

[DWetzel]

Thanks guys. We needed that extra rule.
I guess the staff was bored anyway.

Clearly they needed a break from scoring the last GOTM/COTMs... *hint, hint*