Prepoll Discussion: Redefining "Playing Ahead"

[GePap]

I think it would be unfair for any minister to have a power others don't. Every ministers makes sugestions based on their knowledge, skills and intuitions. We follow their instructions because they have been given the responsibility, but responsibility also means being responsible if a plan fails. To let the FAM play ahead is to let the FAM shirk responsibility, while the IEM, or the SMAC, or the PWM are not allowed to do so.

I have another questions regarding saved games: I was not here a th beginning but I have though up of two ways to use the game that are not playing ahead that might or are cheating, and I was wondering if we have already taken decision on them: What about someone retiring from the game, and thus getting to see the entire map and histograph? What about someone going back to an old save, playing the game in a different way, and then comming to the forum to state that ad X been done and not Y, Z would have happened, and Z woul be better than were we are. Would we punish someone from doing that?

[Shiber]

Games are saved and posted at the end of the last turned that was played on the turnchat. However the turn is not ended so people who download the savegame can still engage in trade and diplomacy.
As for allowing the FAM and the FAM only to play ahead, I think they should still get approval of their plans before they are played by the president during the turnchat.

[Kloreep]

GePap, I'm 99% sure retiring is explicitly not allowed. After all, that would be revealing the map, which is definitely not allowed.

Your second example is more ambiguous (sp?) since it's technically only playing differently, not ahead, but I'd say it's not allowed, if only because you might reveal information useful to the current game. For example, what if you had, through some bizarre turn of events, established an embassy with Germany or Persia before the suspected battle between them and told us if they were at war then? We'd have a piece of information we shouldn't have.

Anyway, I agree that playing ahead in any form should not be allowed. Risk is an integral part of Civ.

[Trevman]

NO PLAYING AHEAD!!

We shouldn't even think about it. There has already been some incidences with playing along, and now you want to play ahead!? No way, too risky.

[Spiffor]

Davout :
Actually, before doing any tech-whoring plan, you take a risk. The rational estimates you draw could be proven wrong.

Unlike adjusting the sliders and giving new build orders to cities, accepting (not to be confused with negociating) a trade is something you can't go back on, exactly like when you move a unit.
If I was playing ahead when designing a tech-whoring plan, I would say "oh rats, the Brits won't buy currency, despite my estimations ; I shall cancel the plan".
Doing so would be exactly the same as Uber sending some troops ahead "just to check", and adjust his strategies with information the others don't have (he doesn't do this, don't worry )

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Davout :

If I was playing ahead when designing a tech-whoring plan, I would say "oh rats, the Brits won't buy currency, despite my estimations ; I shall cancel the plan".
Doing so would be exactly the same as Uber sending some troops ahead "just to check", and adjust his strategies with information the others don't have (he doesn't do this, don't worry )

But Spiffor - you DO open negotiations with the leaders in the course of researching trades, don't you? That is the only way that you would know who has which techs and would tell you how much some civs would be willing to trade for what we had to offer. Of course, you wouldn't end the turn or make a trade just to see what another civ offers you for what you just got - that is performing an action and is "playing ahead". But the until you actually accept anyhthing it's fine, right?

If you somehow estimate off the top of your head
1. what techs/gold other civs have
2. how much they will offer for some trade with us

then my hat is off to you. This is a seemingly impossible task, and I pity anyone who has to do this after you finish!

[Spiffor]

MWIA :
Sorry I was unclear. There is difference between negociating a trade, and accepting it.

But the until you actually accept anyhthing it's fine, right?

Absolutely : I never get the figures out of my head, I'm only haggling like crazy, until I reach the limit of AI acceptance, as indicated by the ingame foreign advisor. Then, I simply cancel the trade, after taking notes of the figures.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Thanks a bunch, Spiffor! It's as I thought. I wonder why no-one could clear up my confusion earlier?


/me thinks of Demo game citizens reading his posts and laughing their asses off.

[Captain]

SPiffor's way seemes ethical to me.
but remember we had someone do somehting with the map trades a while back? they actually did play ahead by selling mapmaking to countries that didn't have it, in order to see whether a mapwhoring project would work. that was playing ahead and shouldn't have been allowed. but it's in the past. we should definitely try to avoid doing so in the future.

[rush]

quote : Spiffor's techwhoring project

" The project says :
- buy Currency from the French for 278 gold + territory map
- sell Currency to the English for Construction + WM
- sell Construction to the Greeks for 174 gold + WM
- sell Literature to Germany for 31 gold + WM
- sell Polytheism to Russia for 17 gold + WM

Estimated treasury after the complete plan : 443 gold
Estimated treasury if we don't sell Literature and Polytheism : 395 gold "

Spiffor, how do you estimate that the Greeks will be paying us 174 gold + WM for Construction ? I mean, we don't even have Construction yet.

P.S. I have already voted "Yes" for the Plan.

[Kuciwalker]

Spiffor is just VERY GOOD at this. I want to make it easier to confirm these things.

[GodKing]

NO PLAYING AHEAD OF ANY KIND.

This game involves RISK. Any knowledge of what any possible future might hold is potentially dangerious in that it would reduce the risk. Fine, why stick you neck out......because that is part of the game, that is why. So please, do not look ahead.

[Shiber]

Spiffor's guess regarding Greece is probably based on the facts that Greece only has 174 gold and that AIs would pay much more than that for a tech.
Of course if they're researching currency and they're near completion then they wouldn't agree to pay as much, but that's one of the risks involved.

[Spiffor]

Rush :
Shiber is right. My estimations are based on the assumption that Construction's value is higher than the whole Greek treasury. For the Greeks, we have a safety, because we could sell them currency if they've almost completed research on constrction (ie, they value it much less).

BTW, even if I'm experienced in tech-whoring I might be wrong. There's a slight chance that this plan turns out to be a catastrophe. Exactly lmike our archer rush could have been our doom (ask Trip for his bad memories )

[rush]

Thanks Spiffor. I gotta practice this in my own Games.