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. mzprox

    mzprox Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Hungary
    I don't talk about AI nor costly early war, but the wandering of the first unit which -if it gets lucky-can eliminate a neighbour while it's building a worker/workboat.
    And don't tell me that if I'm worried I should start with a warrior, because no one will delay the first worker with 3-4 turns.
    Anyway I'm not expecting rulechange because of this, I'm just as i've said worried that our or someone else's civ would get eliminated this way.
     
  2. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    On the flip side, since B has the luxury of having seen everything that A has done, they have a major advantage in being able to do all those things in response to A and have them take effect immediately. All of A's actions are effectively delayed a turn compared to B's actions, in identical but reversed scenarios.

    Under this rule proposal looks to me like it is clearly an advantage, after the first turn, to be on the "defending" side of the timer.

    An alternative rule that I've seen was that A could do non-movement actions between B's movements and EOT. IE split the timer into 3 sections instead of 2:

    A moves
    B moves
    A and B are both allowed to do non-movement actions.

    Now a bunch of people will say that's difficult/impossible to enforce. If the mod didn't just control/monitor logins, but instead monitored what in-game actions are taken, then it would indeed be possible to enforce. But if we're trying to create absolute fairness, personally I'd prefer a fair rule over an enforceable one. I also have a global preference for winning by overwhelming force in-game over whining about technicalities to get a penalty imposed or a redo. :p Not that I actually win that much -- and I prefer to lose by overwhelming force than whine about technicalities... :crazyeye:

    Speaking for myself, not as a representative of CivFanatics.
     
  3. Regis Hastur

    Regis Hastur Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    Germany
    Fixed your problem ;)
     
  4. fluffyflyingpig

    fluffyflyingpig Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    116

    This is a very interesting suggestion Dave.

    However, from what I have been able to glean from what extremely little documentation this mod has, this is not possible.
     
  5. SevenSpirits

    SevenSpirits Immortal?

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    512
    I can think of two advantages of being first in turn order immediately:

    1) You get to move newly-produced units first - your cities can produce units which can then immediately move before your opponent even knows they exist. Whereas you can e.g. retreat your chariot if your opponent's city completes a spear.

    2) You're half a turn ahead of your opponent!
     
  6. Regis Hastur

    Regis Hastur Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    Germany
    Hello folks,

    We are a bit confused, cause spionage and reli/civic swap rules are changed after snakepick has started. We demand a final and clear rule what is allowed and what is not.
    As far as I know spionage is on and civic/reli swap is allowed. Can this be confirmed?

    Regis
     
  7. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,792
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
  8. Yuufo

    Yuufo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    54
    Does a finalized ruleset proposal exist, that I should present to my team for validation?
     
  9. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd I never yielded

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,792
    Location:
    Wakanda Forever
    No. Not yet we are developing that now.
     
  10. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Yuufo (and others), look to these posts:

    Proposed General Rules

    Proposed Double Move Rule

    There are a few minor things which have yet to be decided - such as determining exactly when and how map information can be traded - but on the whole these two posts cover most issues of importance that have been brought up so far. They are not a final version of the rules, but they're a good idea of what the final version will look like.

    It'd be good if the folks on your team (and all others) have a careful look at these two posts and decide whether you're happy with all the things covered so far. If there are some things you're not quite happy with, you can suggest what tweaks you would like to see. :)
     
  11. Yuufo

    Yuufo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    54
    The Proposed General Rules state that civic/reli switch spionage missions are forbidden.
    Is this correct and definitive? I read lots of debate about it.
     
  12. tobiasn

    tobiasn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    Yeah Yuufo the final vote is to allow these missions. The proposed general rules are outdated in that regard, hopefully someone can fix it to stop further confusion.
     
  13. fluffyflyingpig

    fluffyflyingpig Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Teams both voted and changed their vote after the ruleset was proposed regarding espionage. Updated rules:

     
  14. Yuufo

    Yuufo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    54
    Ok thanks guys :)
     
  15. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Does the mod actually prohibit logins, or does it just report them? If it only reports them, then the 3-phase method is possible. Or we have the option to keep the 3-phase proposal and revisit the decision on the mod given that the game hasn't actually started.

    TBH the reason I wanted the mod was for the BUG stuff. The interface improvements are worth their lines of code in gold.

    Speaking for myself and not a CivFanatics rep.
     
  16. mostly-harmless

    mostly-harmless Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Germany
    I suggest to include West Point into Rule 3.4 as well.

    mh
     
  17. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    And why is that?
     
  18. mostly-harmless

    mostly-harmless Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Germany
    Doesn't West Point need a unit of sufficient XP as well?

    mh
     
  19. talonschild

    talonschild Drive-By NESer

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    1,946
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    It does - level 6.
     
  20. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    I misread it like 4.3 and was wondering what unknown bug hides West Point :D

    Personally I am against this 3.4 rule, but we will make the rules later.
     

Share This Page