Preserve Random Seed?

[malichai]

I can't find anyplace for the option to preserve, or not preserve the random seed. The ini has a "Random Seed for Game Synch" line, but trying both the default of 0 and changing it to 1 doesn't seem to affect the ingame random seed. Results for what happens within a turn are predetermined right now, it seems.

Hopefully, I'm just stupid and missed the option inside the game itself to be able to choose to not preserve the random seed.

[Akaoz]

Heh, so now the save/load-cheat is harder...

[kimmygibler]

So if there is no option to change it, does it preserve or not? I really hope it preserves, especially with all the constant crashing problems.

[nbarclay]

For most purposes, I like preserving the seed, but I'll be really annoyed if there isn't a way to turn it off because there are some types of experimentation where running repeated tests without the same seed in each is really useful.

[malichai]

Originally posted by kimmygibler
So if there is no option to change it, does it preserve or not? I really hope it preserves, especially with all the constant crashing problems.

Yes, it preserves. It seems that if nothing changes to use the next number in the cycle, then it'll always be that number.

[Locutus]

The INI option is for MP, I think. Not quite sure what exactly it does. Normal games always have seed preservation, to avoid reload cheating, as mentioned.

If you want to run some kind of test, you can probably accomplish the desired effect with some Python code (depending on what it is exactly).

[spydermr2]

random seed, presumption, etc.

It's almost hysterical, listening to people talk about "cheating". We're talking (mostly) about a solo-player game. If someone wants to have the capacity to have the tribal villages "randomize", as they have in every other Civ game (including Civ3, when they finally put in the OPTION when enough people complained), and have that as an OPTION, then fine. That would be designing a game to let the players decide how the players want to play it -- and giving them the OPTION to do so. No one's advocating that the "seed" should be fixed to be randomized -- they'd just like the option. I shouldn't say that -- by designing the game to not include the option, Firaxis is saying, we know this was popular through the first three games, but we don't like it, so we aren't even going to give you the option.

On top of the lack of an easy-to-use editor to allow random map generation and mapmaking and rules setting (as in Civ3), this is just... arrogant presumption. Play like we want you to play, no other way. We won't even give you the option, although it hurts no one and makes more people happy if we do give you the option (and by definition because it's an OPTION it hurts no one else's game).

[spydermr2]

another question

So in Civs 1-3, it's "cheating". What exactly is "cheating" about wanting the "tribal villages"/"goodie huts" to be randomized as an option (not required, a checkbox so we can choose to play the game we want to play)? Who's being cheated? How is it cheating, wanting the option?

It's astonishing that a game company would put out three games with a certain feature, then start calling the feature they made popular "cheating" and no longer offer it even as an option (which would hurt NO ONE, since those who like it non-randomized wouldn't be affected AT ALL).

[Locutus]

Re: random seed, presumption, etc.

Originally posted by spydermr2
It's almost hysterical, listening to people talk about "cheating".

Play some tournaments, succession games, AU games, Demogames, etc and you'll realise that this is an important issue.

we know this was popular through the first three games

Was it? Maybe there was some demand for it, but there's a much, much higher demand for eliminating it, as it's a major issue for many forms of communal/competitive play. There's also the design problem that reloading takes people out of the game environment and atmosphere, which is something game designers want to avoid at all cost, that's a key element of the Firaxis design philosophy.

If there is a lot of demand, maybe they'll add it again in a patch, but many people, including Firaxis, will think it to be good riddance.

On top of the lack of an easy-to-use editor

There is a very good World Builder and the XML and Python files (for which there are dozens, if not hundreds of freeware, shareware and cheap commercial editors available) give players more power than they could ever dream of. And it's already been announced that a BMP2Map converter (and a VERY powerful one at that, I might add) will be released shortly, as well as additional mods, scenarios and mapscripts. I don't see the complaint here.

Play like we want you to play, no other way.

Now you're just making a fool out of yourself. I suggest you have a look at the all the map scripts, scenarios, premade maps, startup-options and modding tools (and realise that all of that is just the tip of the iceberg -- can you say source code release?) before you make statements like that.

If this is the biggest thing you can think of to complain about, doesn't that say something about the rest of the game?

[Akaoz]

*shrug* All I know is, when you re-load a game to change the outcome of a battle or goodie-hut it's called a save/load-cheat. Personaly I don't care what people do in SP, I was just making an observation. This is an issue for PBEM and the like though.

[Grumbold]

They added the option to deactivate the random seed back into Civ 3. I expect it will reappear in Civ 4. Its important that the seed is preserved for all forms of competitive gaming but completely unnecessary for a single player game.

[kcmurphy88]

So, let me get this straight: some people here think that they have the right to force other people to conform to their style of playing the game? What arrogance.

[MattPilot]

Sorry locotus.. but...

"Play like we want you to play, no other way." <- seems to be a very true statement around here.

A lot of people buy Civ for THEIR personal enjoyment. A lot dont' care about Multiplayer. I will probably never touch Multiplayer. Its just to fast paced for me. I like it more relaxed. And when i play SP, i want to play it the way i enjoy it the most.

Removing random seed, or removing the ability to plant a forest, or other such stupid things, just because some douchebag multiplayer player thinks it can be abused is redicules.

What do you care how other people play their singleplayer game?


I'm curious as to how many potential features we lost because the AU betatester crowd convinced soren to remove it.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by MattPilot
I'm curious as to how many potential features we lost because the AU betatester crowd convinced soren to remove it.

17

[MattPilot]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


17

dang it.. i knew it