Ruleset Discussion

Question
I saw something in the pitboss thread about using go-to commands ... this is considered cheating in C3C :confused: has the problem been fixed in cIV or will this be outlawed in the main MTDG ???

Sorry i posted this in the game questions thread as well .
 
BCLG100 said:
Nope i fully support what CH is saying it adds realism to the game.
So from what I just deal these two smilies will be very usefu, even thought they are not really part of our smilie list, which is a shame.
First we have a deal.
deal.gif
Then we have a backstab
backstab.gif
when ever we want to trash a deal. We could be laughing at those who fell for a good plan.
pointandlaugh.gif
 
so have we come to an agreement on whether backstabbing is allowed?
 
[opinion=Mine]

yes backstabbing is allowed, but you will be remembered. If not in this game then in another. So it is severely frowned upon but allowed

[/opinion]
 
backstabbing in what way...define. I mean theres :

1. "hey lets go fight them" then I attack you.
2. And then theres "OK wars is over, now I want you land too".
3. And then the lesser know.."Ok lets go kick their butts...oh I will send my troops in a few turns" "Ooh sorry my troops never got there in time"

Degreees of back stabbing right...
 
We'll see what GA's opinion is, but yes, backstabbing will be allowed. However, be mindful of your reputation, as it may very well follow you throughout your civ career.
 
RegentMan said:
backstabbing will be allowed. However, be mindful of your reputation, as it may very well follow you throughout your civ career.

Interesting but difficult in a team environment, hopefully it will NOT follow the Foreign Minister as he is just the mouth piece for the whole team. :)
 
I think that the reputation is attributed to the whole (active) team not just the mouth. We kind of know who the active players are. That's an added incentive to keep the rogue treaty breakers in check.
 
the only problem will be that if someone backstabs in this game it may be carried over into another game like someone has already stated.
 
I updated the copy here and took out that clause.

I'm still waiting on the patch to see if the anarchy exploit needs to be written in, in which case we'll use the GOTM description (or the HoF's).

Is there anything else you guys can think of that is imperative?
 
It looks good to me.

The only thing that I would consider adding is the "unfun statement" from Rik in the Civ3 MTDG. I think that that summed it up as far as "spirit of the game".
 
have no idea whether this is possible or a patch has fixed it (or if it was ever an issue). But with unit gifting, it could be conceivable that with open borders, a team gift a unit near the border to another team. The other team could then fight a common enemy with the unit, and since combat doesn't use all the movement points (when on rails/road), it could move back to the original civ's territory and be used to fight again (or heal).
 
It's even worse than that. If the civ doing the gifting is non-military and the one receiving is military, the unit get 2xp for free, and keeps it if gifted back.

This might be fixed in the new patch, but maybe we should check it out before starting, just in case. That's also assuming there are any mil civs, don't remember. :crazyeye:
 
the aggresive thing is already in the ruleset, I just wanted to point out the further difficulty
 
If no one has any other issues to bring up, then I don't see why not. However, it might be wise to wait until the game gets going, that way we don't have to wake everyone up twice.
 
Ginger_Ale said:
2.0. In Game Actions
2.1. Renaming Units
When renaming units, be sure you are not confusing the other teams (nor having the intent to confuse them). If you give them independent names, put an abbreviation of the unit type somewhere before or after the name so everyone knows the unit type.

When you rename a unit, Civ4 always adds the unit type in parentheses. So you don't need an abbreviation.
 
Back
Top Bottom