AI relocating workers; Hotseat mode

[SlowThinker]

You got me to work, Darius. Here it is:
********************************************
point 1.

Originally posted by Darius

Originally posted by SlowThinker
also anybody can do the save/load loop

...which is not considered cheating, for the moment at least.

OK. There are 2 possibilities:

a) a game where reloading is not considered as cheating.
This game is warp enough. Warriors kill tanks etc. Any other cheating cannot harm it anymore. You agree yourself:

Originally posted by Darius

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Hm, I don't think cheating (map revealing} might cause big harm to so strange games...

That's another argument we used; reloading for 'reconnaissance' brings the same result as revealing the map, so should be considered morally equivalent. This, also, was lost on them.

b) a game where reloading is considered as cheating.
My reason remains...

...unless...

Originally posted by Darius

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Do you think there is a difference if people can cheat by 2 ways or 10 ways?

ABSOLUTELY.

...but you will have to explain it more concrete. Take a game where any warrior can kill a tank and players detect enemy units by moving their own units and reloading back. Explain how the game will be corrupted if somebody will remove a password moreover?
Another point is that you are in contradiction with yourown words in the quote under point a)

---

point 2.

Originally posted by Darius
most would only be able to think of one or two ways.

1. one or two ways are enough IMHO (see last paragraph in point 1)
2. the desired situation is not that most people don't cheat and few cheat. You want that nobody cheats. And the current policy feed possible cheating.

but when methods of cheating are publicly posted it could light a spark in some of them. Why take the risk?

Due to point 1 there is nothing to be risked. Most people can cheat/spoil the game by reloading. Some people can use more ways.

---

point 3.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
You will say:
A) There are some ways how to cheat, we know them, but we won't reveal them to you because you could eventually try.
B) Cheating is very easy, you can do it this way, but we trust you.
Which sentence brings mistrust? A) or B)?

Which sentence will result in more games ruined by cheating (a dozen of which I've been a part of)?

You forgot to answer...
Ehm... which policy was used in those ruined games? Did you say sentence B) before those games or not?

Secure and long-lasting games >>>> a 'trusting atmosphere'.

What is a secure game?

---

point 4.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
4. The mistrust atmosphere(2) and capabilities to break obstacles
Imagine two situations:
A) You live in a world where banks deposit banknotes in open shelves. Anybody could steal money easily. There is a trusting atmosphere.
B) You live in a normal world: banks protect money by very sofisticated systems. But you contrived to reveal a loophole there (by an accident or because you struggled for it).
In which situation would you tend to steal easier?

Um, situation A.

Um ...You wouldn't have bad feelings that you used people trust you?
And perceive Civ2 cheating is different. You don't get a free money resp. a free win. You also lose the entertaining elements I described in the thread about reloading.

---

point 5 and 6.

Now I'm sure you're going to say 'well what if someone who doesn't know how to remove passwords wants to check a game?' Answer: they send a PM, IM, or email to Case, Darius871, Henrik, Choke, and/or conmcb25.

If you want to detect possible cheating, then you must open many saves. You never know in advance which you will want to open and you won't be willing to wait hours for each one.

This is NOT to maintain an 'elite', this is merely to make sure that as few people have the knowledge as possible.

But the cheater will feel like an elite man after getting over some obstacles. And he will want to exploit his 'work'. This wouldn't happen if his 'secret knowledges' weren't secret but public.

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Darius
Sorry, but I didn't even read them as reasons. Basically it was a list of reasons 'why posting cheats would make no difference',

I suppose you think about points 1 and 2 only now. Other points explain why the current PBEM policy intensify the possibility that somebody will cheat.

Do you have a second reason to post the methods other than amusing yourself?

1. I want to diminish a possibility that players will cheat.
2. I don't like any kind of censorship (and elements that flow it) in any sphere of human activity.
But I don't amuse myself very well . From other side I am trying to get some positive experience from any situation, so I watch if it is possible to get people think logically about their intuitive stands. The one year old debate at CivFanatics was very triste from this point of view. Thank you for expressing arguments now.

Our goal is very similar. But your policy comes out from a fear that most people would start cheating but don't care if only few people do it. My policy want to clear cheating completely.
You are simply more pesimistic that me: IMHO if you explain to players that there is nothing heroic on cheating (you explain anybody can do it) and you stress that cheating would deprive them from all entertaining elements of the game then only idiot will cheat.
Another problem is there are no rules in PBEM games and some people got accustomed to things like reloading...

[SlowThinker]

relocation of workers

Originally posted by germanos
Any news on the apparent Demographics-relocation relation?
Have you been able to look at the imp1870 game?

I didn't accomplish any tests that you don't know about.
But I can report that existing tests proved the Demographics window relocates workers and there weren't noticed any others causes of relocating.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
OK. There are 2 possibilities:

a) a game where reloading is not considered as cheating.

This game is warp enough. Warriors kill tanks etc. Any other cheating cannot harm it anymore. You agree yourself:

That's another argument we used; reloading for 'reconnaissance' brings the same result as revealing the map, so should be considered morally equivalent. This, also, was lost on them.

Note the words 'was lost on them'; my argument doesn't matter since reloading is still legal. Whether the game is warped or not, the players in the game decided to not have it be cheating.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
b) a game where reloading is considered as cheating.

What about it?

Originally posted by SlowThinker
...but you will have to explain it more concrete. Take a game where any warrior can kill a tank and players detect enemy units by moving their own units and reloading back. Explain how the game will be corrupted if somebody will remove a password moreover?

You're putting words in my mouth; I never said 10 cheats in a game are worse than 2 cheats in a game. I said that having the general public know 10 methods of cheating is worse than having them know 2 methods of cheating. Two very different things.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Another point is that you are in contradiction with yourown words in the quote under point a)

Sorry, I don't know what you're referring to here.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
1. one or two ways are enough IMHO (see last paragraph in point 1)

See my response to that paragraph; I was referring to one or two methods of cheating being publicly known, not used in a particular game.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
2. the desired situation is not that most people don't cheat and few cheat. You want that nobody cheats. And the current policy feed possible cheating.

Explain how hiding methods of cheating encourages cheating. You could say that hiding them makes little difference, and that people who want to can find them out on their own, and that's a reasonable position. However, saying that it encourages cheating is ridiculous.

Originally posted by SlowThinker

Due to point 1 there is nothing to be risked. Most people can cheat/spoil the game by reloading. Some people can use more ways.

You really need to take reloading out of this discussion completely. You can't say 'a game is already corrupted by reloading, so people knowing and using other cheats makes no difference', because in all but a few games reloading is not considered cheating, and hence using the real cheats are what corrupt the game.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
You forgot to answer...

The nature of the question implied what my answer would be. IMO, A brings mistrust but lower cheating, and B brings trust but higher cheating. Trust is less important to me than having games survive.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Ehm... which policy was used in those ruined games? Did you say sentence B) before those games or not?

*Sigh*, the fact that that cheating occurred under the current policy does not prove that said policy encourages cheating. If you seriously think it does, that's like saying the mayor of a city is directly responsible for every murder that occurs in his city, which is of course false logic.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
What is a secure game?

A game in which cheating does not occur.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Um ...You wouldn't have bad feelings that you used people trust you?
And perceive Civ2 cheating is different. You don't get a free money resp. a free win. You also lose the entertaining elements I described in the thread about reloading.

Sorry again, but I have no clue what this means.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
If you want to detect possible cheating, then you must open many saves. You never know in advance which you will want to open and you won't be willing to wait hours for each one.

What does this have to do with publishing methods of cheating?

Not only is this irrelevant, it's wrong. Normally when someone checks a file it is because a player has com to him with a suspicion about a specific turn, and the checker looks at that file. Nobody (except for Duke of Marlbrough at CFC) checks random files, so your point is moot.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
But the cheater will feel like an elite man after getting over some obstacles. And he will want to exploit his 'work'. This wouldn't happen if his 'secret knowledges' weren't secret but public.

IMO, they usually cheat in order to win (or simply not lose) the game, not to marvel in their computer skills (if you don't believe me, I can probably get a few to testify this to you). It is from this perspective that I say public knowledge would increase cheating.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
I suppose you think about points 1 and 2 only now. Other points explain why the current PBEM policy intensify the possibility that somebody will cheat.

I still don't see how hiding cheating methods encourages cheating, and I don't read it in your points. I don't see how an atmosphere of mistrust and elitism (neither of which I've noticed in my time here) entices one to cheat. Also, detection cannot possibly prevent someone from cheating, as it is only a response.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
1. I want to diminish a possibility that players will cheat.

Considering we haven't had a single incident in half a year (immediately after a half-year with cheater after cheater after cheater), I'm pretty damn confident in the current system, and dop't want to rock the boat. Once there are several cheaters caught you can start talking about change. Cheating is such a tiny issue these days, I have no clue why you're making such a big deal out of it.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
2. I don't like any kind of censorship (and elements that flow it) in any sphere of human activity.

So far that's the only argument you've made so far that I can sympathise with.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Our goal is very similar. But your policy comes out from a fear that most people would start cheating but don't care if only few people do it. My policy want to clear cheating completely.

Again: how would telling people (who have never even thought of cheating in their entire time here) every way there is to cheat end all cheating, now and forever? That position to me is downright insane.

Originally posted by SlowThinker
You are simply more pesimistic that me: IMHO if you explain to players that there is nothing heroic on cheating (you explain anybody can do it) and you stress that cheating would deprive them from all entertaining elements of the game then only idiot will cheat.

AND THE WORLD IS FULL OF IDIOTS!!! Thieves know full well that they could go to jail if they steal, but they do it anyway. Husbands know full well that they could face a divorce if they cheat on their wives, but they do it anyway. Kids know full well they could crash and get a concussion if they don't wear their helmets while riding their bikes, but they do it anyway. Drunk drivers know full well they could get in a car crash when driving drunk, but they do it anyway. Crackheads know full well that they might overdose if they smoke too much rock, but they do it anyway. Cheaters knew that they'd lose the "entertaining elements" of the game and not look heroic if they cheated, but they did it anyway. This is not pessimism, this is realism.