Ruleset Discussion

[Xerol]

Regarding accidental espionage - all team's spoiler threads should be required to have a certain amount of "whitespace" in the first post, because of the thread preview thing - it's very easy to accidentally get a glimpse of what's in the first post if the mouse happens to hover over the thread title.

 

[vbraun]

Regarding accidental espionage - all team's spoiler threads should be required to have a certain amount of "whitespace" in the first post, because of the thread preview thing - it's very easy to accidentally get a glimpse of what's in the first post if the mouse happens to hover over the thread title.

It won't make a diffrence when we all have our own Private Forums. Plus You can't give out to much info this early in the game, all where doing is deicding on Team names and the Civs you want to be. You'll be able to acess that type of info once the game has started.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

Once all teams have come up with a team name, then we will get private forums from Thunderfall. This is your incentive to come up with a team name QUICKLY!

@RegentMan and Whomp: I think there should be no limit on time between joining teams. Just there should be a rule saying "you are not allowed to give out spoiler info that the new team you are on would not know about if you had not joined. If you have to give out spoiler info to prove your case, then do not post / vote in the thread.". Does that make sense?

 

[Whomp]

Our Team name is K.I.S.S.

I like your rule Ginger Ale. I think that is the most fair.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

It has been added as rule 0.3.3.

Official team name is Team K.I.S.S ? Thank you.

 

[vbraun]

What does K.I.S.S. stand for?

 

[Whomp]

We are bunch of idiots and Grumps so the simpler the better. It kind of fits us like a mitten (or is it glove...I'm not sure).

 

[RegentMan]

I still personally think that any refugee should be able to tell what he knows to the accepting team. I would like to see rule 0.3.3 polled by the teams.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

That is essentially espionage, is it not? Gaining intelligence not available by viewing the save?

 

[RegentMan]

It is also suppressing your teammates by telling them they can't vote/post simply because they have information that you don't have.

By the way, I've posted the poll here.

 

[Xerol]

How about a "migration" period, dependant on distance between the losing team's last city and the capital of their new nation?

 

[Ginger_Ale]

What if the two civs don't know each other's capital?

There are 3 options, really:

a. Let new refugees share everything.
b. Let new refugees take part in discussion, but not use spoiler info.
c. Let new refugees only lurk the new team's forum.

Obviously I want everyone to be active, and b is a compromise of both...

 

[Whomp]

Option B seems reasonable to me. Maybe it's just me but I don't think my team would be interested in helping anyone if we lost.

 

[ybbor]

I have a few questions.

regarding rule;
1.6: once navigation has been discovered you can send screenshots right?
1.7: we're allowed to do a middleman thing right? so we're between team A and team B, we trade our (only) wines to team B for 20gpt, and then buy team A's excess wines for 15gpt right? and do we have to tell Team A that we're selling them to Team B?
1.8:"city gifts/trades that are temporary in nature (i.e. only a few turns in duration)"...'will be considered against the spirit of the rule'. We are still allowed to gift someone a city for 20 turns or so, if they want to use it to base planes at when they fight a war right? as long as that's the intended purpose, not contact or anything?

also, vaugly reagrding 1.6, but i think it should be added a s a rule to make it more clear. when we start, we shouldn't be able to say "hey, we're at the lower left corner of the map! send a curraugh and trade with us!" or can we? I don't think we should It probably wasn't the devolpers intent

 

[Ginger_Ale]

This thread is meant to be locked. I will ask a mod to merge this with the ruleset discussion registry.

1.6: Correct.
1.7: You can do the trade you mentioned. 1.7 is to protect people from saying "move 2NE, 3S, and 4NW to reach Civ X" until they get either Navigation or Printing Press.
1.8: You are better off abandoning your city and letting the other team build a city there, rather than giving them something for 20 turns. This was a touchy issue in the ISDG. I would prefer no city trading unless it is a peace deal. This will go on a case by case basis. 20 turns is a LONG amount of time.

You can say "hey, we live southwest of you", but not grid coordinates, screenshots, hand drawings, etc. A simple direction is the most until the tech. Don't say "lower left", rather say "southwest" so they don't know exactly where. But then again, do you really want them to find you without you finding them... ?

 

[ybbor]

are we allowed to have trade embargoes without embassies?

 

[Ginger_Ale]

I think that is ok, yes. I will see what RegentMan has to say.

 

[RegentMan]

That's fine. It's just like having a right of passage deal without the embassy. However, without the in-game treaty signed, be forwarned that there's nothing stopping your friend from trading with the enemy (only their friendship with you). Same for RoP. You won't get the road bonus without the actual treaty.

 

[zyxy]

Generally looks good. Few comments:

0.1: What is the purpose of stating punishment levels if they are indicational only? Stating maximum levels is the only thing that makes sense IMO (and is standard judicial practice). Otherwise, please leave it out. Also, forcing a team to skip upward of 30-40 turns is equivalent to retirement IMO (and that would be the easier solution).

0.3: if people switch teams it is quite impossible to prevent them from sharing spoiler info. Even their silence speaks. Conclusion: this rule cannot be enforced...

1.8: The "definition" bit seems wider in scope than the "purpose" bit, also including city-gifting for other purposes than contacts or preventing conquest. Is gifting a naval or air base allowed? Or gifting to let your ally gain a resource?

1.9: is this even possible in C3C?

5.2.2: is there a final game?

6.3: is there anything against uploading?

 

[RegentMan]

0.1: What is the purpose of stating punishment levels if they are indicational only? Stating maximum levels is the only thing that makes sense IMO (and is standard judicial practice). Otherwise, please leave it out. Also, forcing a team to skip upward of 30-40 turns is equivalent to retirement IMO (and that would be the easier solution).

They're there to let you know the general level of punishment. The 30-40 turn skipping is only for highly unsportsmanship play (spying, etc.)

0.3: if people switch teams it is quite impossible to prevent them from sharing spoiler info. Even their silence speaks. Conclusion: this rule cannot be enforced...

Which is why I began a poll. Please discuss it in your team's private forum.

1.8: The "definition" bit seems wider in scope than the "purpose" bit, also including city-gifting for other purposes than contacts or preventing conquest. Is gifting a naval or air base allowed? Or gifting to let your ally gain a resource?

If a team submitted their trade proposal with one of those reasons, I'd say no. Air naval base? Have your ally ferry over a settler. Resource? Trade them one!

1.9: is this even possible in C3C?

I think it was in there to avoid any possible bugs that could allow the great leader to do so (if there are any. Better safe than sorry).

5.2.2: is there a final game?

Nope. I must has missed that when going through and rewording the rules.

6.3: is there anything against uploading?

No, but it wouldn't be the smartest thing to do, just like uploading screenies. Any other team can look through the uploads folder and stumble upon it, opening the doors for espionage.