1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Ruleset Discussion

Discussion in 'Civ4 -ISDG 2012' started by Lord Parkin, Jun 1, 2012.

  1. Kloreep

    Kloreep Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    73
    WPC would like to see all image files banned from team diplomacy prior to in-game discovery of Paper. We think any kind of text should be fine though.
     
  2. talonschild

    talonschild Drive-By NESer

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    1,946
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Provided said text is not creating an actual map with text by placing symbols in coordinates reflecting the map. Text must be used as description. Correct?
     
  3. Inao

    Inao Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    71
    I would say provided that text doesn't make rule useless. The text should only give approximate knowledge of map, like a direction (N, S, E, W, NE, NW, SE, SW) and a distance qualifier (near, far), and should not be used to describe map, but for instance to agree on frontier or warm of a barbarian.
     
  4. Kloreep

    Kloreep Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    73
    Speaking for my team: BTW, WPC wants only to ban images. We don't support limiting text communication.

    Speaking for myself: (Though certainly some other members of my team voiced the same concerns.) How approximate is approximate?

    You can only go so detailed before you're practically discussing individual tiles. You can only go so vague before attempting communication is useless, hence the drive for detail.

    Again: I have yet to hear a satisfactorily specific rule for controlling text that will avoid argument and recrimination in the case of strict enforcement, or teams essentially playing under different rules in the case of loose enforcement that leaves everyone to their own devices.
     
  5. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Double move/timer split rule proposal. We're going to need this regardless of whether we have a mod, because the mod does not protect against double moves in the first turn of war. It also doesn't protect against teams not at war colluding to assist teams at war, amongst other things.

    Here is the rule for discussion:

    Once again I reiterate that this is required regardless of whether or not we have a mod.
     
  6. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    I'm not sure I understand the restriction on not logging in, especially for the case where your team has ended turn, with "*" showing. It is impossible for team A to take actions in that state that have any effect on what team B does.
     
  7. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Even after ending turn, you can still move units, change builds, whip and draft cities, change research, and so on. This was written from the perspective of not having a mod to restrict logins. Some of it may be rendered redundant if we use the mod, but this way we cover all our bases - whether in case of not using a mod, or in case of a loophole being found in the mod.

    I still firmly suggest we do not use this game as a testing ground for a new version of a mod, especially since the mod culls player numbers and only provides partial protection against double moves. Using the above ruleset combined with Civstats would work far better and without excluding anyone from playing.
     
  8. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    None of those actions have any effect until the next turn, therefore they don't affect what Team B is doing. At least as far as I'm aware of.
     
  9. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    They affect the following turn though. If Team A plays, then Team B moves in a stack out of the fog, then Team A logs back in and changes its builds/research and whips/drafts units in response to the new information, that will affect Team B's chances of e.g. taking a city.
     
  10. Manolo65

    Manolo65 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    45
    A few words about how my mod works.

    The turn lenght is always the same to all players.

    So it would not be necessary declaring Wars at first 6 hours.
    Always the attacked player has 24 hours more.

    Ee didn't want to implement the first turn war double move rule in the mod.
    but if it is implemented on the web,a warning is sent to the game admin at this case.

    War at second half of turn:

    if team A plays before team B at turn X-1.
    The team A should declare war as the second turn
    If team A plays 5 minutes before the end of the turn, team B has a problem.
    On the web there will be a button (I want to declare war as second )
    Team B may click it and when team A finish his turn Team B will have 24 hours to play
    safely without the admin having to do anything.
     
  11. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    What happens for the players not at war - can they play at any time?

    And what physically happens with the game timer? Does it start at 24 hours, then jump back to 24 hours after A has played? Or does it show 48 hours at the start?
     
  12. Manolo65

    Manolo65 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    45
    Players not at war finish their turn ( * ) at the normal timer ( 24 hours from turns begin). but they may enter as often as they wants after this obviously.

    Mod internally uses a counter for each player and places the minimum of all at general timer.
     
  13. HUSch

    HUSch Secret-monger

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,440
    Location:
    Germany
    The turn goes on and all other have to make their before ending the last warrrior, what is, if the tp doesn't end the turn, it's often so.

    Another cause
    A and B are in league, C and D also; A declare war at C and B don't D; what is, when D declare war at B? First in the rules, but also in the mod, if there is after some time war between A and D or B and C?

    I don't think you can dlear all possibilities (I can think of) in algorithm!
     
  14. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    I don't understand the settler rule. If indeed two players are going to the same spot, or an overlapping one, and are aware of each other - who should decide who gets to settle? As long as we're doing simultanious turns, isn't it fair that whoever gets there first, or is willing to settle first - in real time - gets the spot?
     
  15. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    That then encourages clock games; deliberately trying to arrange things so you can be in the game instantly upon the turn flip to make sure that you settle first in a tight situation. Better to discourage (or outlaw) that sort of behavior.
     
  16. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    I get that, but who decides who gets the spot? Coin-toss? :D

    To be more precise: When REXing you probably don't know that your opponent is heading for the same spot as you. Or you know, and it's a race anyway. And then you both are heading for the same tile/tiles. Noone is the "agressor", and it's fair game - unclaimed land is up for grabs. Right? So if noone is more "entitled" than the other, what constitutes a "cheesy" move?
     
  17. mzprox

    mzprox Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Hungary
    These settling issues should be resolved by diplomacy or failing in that by military..

    On a different topic: am I the only one who thinks we should avoid early elimination by chance? I mean the not soo unlikely event when a wandering warrior finds an unprotected city which is busy producing its first workers. And it's pure luck because the civ which have sent that warrior also left her capital undefended. (it happens time to time and it sucks big time if it's in a big game like this)
    Proposal: a 25-30 turn forced peace between teams.- or something like that.
     
  18. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    It's a rather specific situation, but it crops up from time to time. One example would be double moving a settler to "bump" rival units out of position, especially where you could not have safely moved and settled the city without a double move.

    But if both teams move their settlers more than 12 hours before the turn flip, it's fair game. :)

    If you're concerned, build a Warrior first... or don't let your initial Warrior stray too far. I think a rule of enforced peace would be cheesier than the move itself. It's quite easy to defend yourself if you want to... I'm sure Plako will have spaced starts appropriately.
     
  19. mzprox

    mzprox Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Hungary
    No pro player would start with a warrior when a worker makes more sense for development, also very unlikely they would not send the first unit to explore. I was reading one of Sulla's game report where this early elimination happened to one team, the consensus is that's pure luck. And that sucks in a game where we try to rule out every randomness.
     
  20. HUSch

    HUSch Secret-monger

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,440
    Location:
    Germany
    It's more a player take a quick chance, not the AI gives some a bad/good luck.
    If one thinks, he has a chance to eliminate an other good. If this fails, he has lost all chances in this game. Early war with a neighbour costs the victory, I think.
     

Share This Page