1st Apolyton CIV3 TOURNAMENT : 15-30/November/2001

[Capt Dizle]

Ahlyis,

You wrote: "Or do you naively believe that playing more than once or reloading a saved game is somehow cheating?"

My position is:

Playing more than once and or reloading and then submitting a game in a tourney or comparative game set is blatant cheating. I can't imagine a worst form of cheating. This is my problem with you and why I insulted you.


To answer your questions:

One cannot learn to play the game better by hearing stories about how others cheat.

Learning from another's strategy is not cheating. Much of what is being posted here is not strategy. Letting people know that you can get a settler from a particular hut on a particular turn is not strategy.

When I referred to "people telling how", I was thinking about strategy. For example, if someone said that they used ICS to get a particular result, I might try an ICS game to see if I could get a similar result.

Are you stupid enough to think that I was reading the threads to see where the civs/factions are located or to get map specifics and then using that in a game that I would then submit? I think I am getting insulted here.

To clear up the next point, I have no problem with people posting about their contrived, choreographed, manufactured exercises AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT SUBMIT their production for consideration in the tourney. At that point it becomes cheating and morally bankrupt. I call for all who have done so to publicly withdraw from the tournament.

Maybe Dan can then put their work in a separate category called "These are the results you can get if you cheat".

Finally, in regard to multiplayer, I play PBEM and my thoughts were directed to that. In PBEM reloading is the prime method of cheating. Anyone who would reload in this tourney would surely reload in PBEM competition.

And would not be welcome in my games.

When you are willing to admit that reloading is plainly cheating I will be glad to apologize for pointing out your confusion.

jt

[AnnC]

You like that term "morally bankrupt", jimmytrick... and given the confidence with which you throw it around, we can assume that it does not in any way apply to your own values and behavior.

Is that the impression you mean to create?

[vincepai]

Score:2288
Space Race Victory

Not too terribly good, but I started this game on the 26th, had to hurry. No micromanaging done.

This is the file for the last turn, just press the end turn button at the bottom right of the screen, and you will see the (not very good) victory score.

[vincepai]

Oh yea the year was 1810...embarrassing hehe

[Capt Dizle]

In a reload game you could try tactics that would be ridiculous in a real game. One must assume cities will be defended by two spearmen. In a reload game you can send two archers. According to the civulator an archer has a 36.24% chance of defeating a fortified spearman in a town.
The chance of both of your archers winning would be 13.13%

If you are going to reload you can get by with that. In a real game you wouldn't even try it.

Therefore the results of these contrived games mean nothing.

[Dog of Justice]

Some comments.

I think it's clear that future tourneys should ban save/reload and reading a designated "spoiler" thread, as the Civfanatics tournament currently does. I still made my submission, however, because neither rule was specified, and a good fraction of the submissions before mine had involved violation of one or the other as well. I don't think I'm the only one here who enjoys finding optimal or near-optimal (my current estimate is that the true optimum for that map is a conquest around 1600-1700 BC, and I may post another save file later that demonstrates this, since such a game shouldn't even take that long to play) solutions to a well-defined (if stupidly defined) problem, though, so if I had fun in the process of playing my game, and in the meantime the submission has catalyzed a discussion of the rules that makes future tournament results more skill-dependent, all should be good.

If the rules specified no save/reload, and one still engaged in it, THEN I would agree in designating the person as "morally bankrupt". As it is, it needs to be accepted that this round of the tournament is not as competitive because nothing was said about these gray areas.

Incidentally, I have no problem if the best performers under the rules to be imposed on future tournaments are recognized this round; that should be feasible since people don't seem to be hiding whether or how much they've engaged in save/reload or use of spoiler information. (That's the nice thing about informality, nobody has a motive to be that stupidly ruthless.) I have no interest in being portrayed as someone I'm not, i.e. the best Civ player here, and I already mentioned in a previous post that I'm normally too much of a "builder" to come close to the highest score in a tournament like this. (Though that won't stop me from trying in a future Apolyton tournament. )

[Capt Dizle]

Okay, I admit to having intentionally wandered just a tad beyond the boundaries of decency.

I just do that to focus discussion and stimulate debate. It is one of my faults.

I apologize to all. I don't think anyone here is morally bankrupt. Maybe insolvent (but why quibble).

Am I forgiven?

[Kalani]

alternate universe interference

Okay, here's something no one else encountered, I bet.

I've been playing a single game on this map since a few days after the 15th. Enjoying it quite a bit up until a few nights ago, when we had a big lightning storm here in Hawaii (believe it or not). The next day the computer I'm playing on just won't turn on. So, in the year 1605, a large storm in another universe severed the leader's contact from his empire (which was doing quite well).

In my game I didn't reload at all. I enjoy playing with what comes your way. I did manage to secure the iron and horses to the southeast before the chinese or egyptians got there. Development was proceeding apace. I neglected my military initially and paid for it when Egypt decided I looked ripe for the picking. So they came and knocked over Nineveh (near the iron) and two other cities up north through the jungles. (Gold Jungles someone said? What gold jungle?) They also got the Aztecs to try and join in the fun (killing me). So, having lost three cities, we went into serious military retrenchment, became very active dipolomatically, and got the other civs (Chinese, Persians, and Zulu) to declare war against the Egyptians. While they were fighting, I took back my three cities, and eventually took Eastern Egypt while China scooped the west.

To keep this (my very first!) post short, other highlights: A large Persian Army was isolated far from their turf, finally led to war. I think I'd waited for cavalry, so Persia was crushed. Aztecs were tiny and negligible. Grabbed Persian cities far to the east to contain Greek expansion. Then mutual protection with Greece, and they suggest we divide the Roman lands, which we did, each of us taking five cities (but I got the capital!), but they also razed five--interesting, I hadn't seen the AI do any razing. In those far flung frontier towns I rushed (in Democracy, with money) temples, libraries, even cathedrals, which should pay off once the IBM proprietary power supply from the Mainland (yes, the continental US) gets here around when the tournament ends. Oh well, I'll post my score late.

One of the things I really enjoyed after becoming a large and intimidating empire is that I can extort money per turn for peace treaties. This is prob nothing to some people on here, but I was happily taking in over 100 gold per turn from my neighbors, which I used to support my armies, devoting the rest to research. Definitely a first that couldn't have happened in Civ2!

One thing I noticed: in this game I think aggressors quickly were attacked in return by alliances who then divided their territory. Or rival civs just decided it was time for someone to go, and they all joined in the feeding frenzy. This happened to Egypt, then Persia, then Rome.

Another interesting thing: I got two great leaders (one after heroic epic, I think). One I used for an army, entirely of elite cavalry, which, after being taken down to bare minimum attacking a Roman city, was counterattacked by a Roman knight and destroyed--I hate watching that flag-bearer crumple pitifully! The other leader I used to rush Universal Suffrage. Earlier wonders in Babylon were JS Bach's, Newton's U, and the Great Library (which only got me about three techs!).

Oh, I also got three Persian cities, about five Chinese (including Shanghai, which surprised me), three Aztec, and one Zulu city through culture. I'll be interested to see in multiplayer games if those despot-conquest players can stand up to a more measured conqueror with a robust culture as back up.

That's about where I left it: tension is thick with Greece, and their army is bigger, though I'm building Darwin's, which will give me tanks in time to run riot. The Chinese control the western end, the zulu hold sway in the south, the Greeks the east, with me everything in between. Egypt, Persia, and Rome have left the world stage, and miraculously a tiny three city Aztec "empire" has persisted in the jungle till now. Time: 1605, current score about 1300-1500 I think, as my culture is quite high. I think a domination victory could result soon. Though of course I wish soon didn't mean I have to wait four days for a part from the mainland before I can finish my game!

Oh well, c'est la vie!

P.S.: Hopefully now that some groundrules have been hammered out, we won't have to read so many posts of people arguing in the future.... Other than that, very interesting to see all the different strats, and I look forward to downloading the various replays to see the alternate worlds, as well as posting mine!

(Okay, so it wasn't short.)

Any thoughts?

Aloha!

[AnnC]

Ahlysis, send me email at webmaster@planetacol.com

[MarkG]

well, this time i'll accept all submissions, unless i see something blatant. i dont have the time to play "civ3 cheating judge" so this is mainly up to everyone of you.

people who dont like the idea of save/reloading cheaters are free to check the submitted saved games and provide accurate evidence to back their claim.

i'll do my best to correct any wrong doing

[MisterMuppet]

I understand the results for different victory conditions will be listed. Can I enter the lost 20 times in a row category ?
If not is it possible to add all of the scores from my dismal failures together and submit that ?
Can we have a tournament game on warlord so I stand a chance of completing it?
The Muppet is Sad.

[carpo]

Wow .. what a great game. I love the resources, fighting for strategic areas on the map, and the diplomacy most of all !!

I hit my golden age very early, almost my first battle. I was annoyed at this first, then thought 'what the hell' and proceeded to capture many cities !! .. it was great to have a city producing heaps of shields very early in the game. i wuickly decimated the Aztecs and the Persians. Then a lengthy period of peace allowed me to gain the tech lead, culture lead and force my wonderfull civ onthe rest of the world. mmwaahaaahaaa ! i love it!

Dont think im in the running after seeing some scores, but im mighty happy that this is my first win in Civ3!! .. only played 2 games .... one was the big world map ..and i havnt finished that yet ..and this was my second game !!

Domination win in 1806-8 ..3503 points.

Cant wait 'till the next one !!

(i stuffed up and posted this to a new thread ... can you delete a thread that you started? ... i feel very silly

[Ossi]

My idea for the next tournament: Everybody starts with 2 settlers and no huts near the 2 settlers and no reload allowed. Of course you can't check this, but somebody who works with reloading has not that huge advantage in this case.

[ChrisShaffer]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Are you stupid enough to think that I was reading the threads to see where the civs/factions are located or to get map specifics and then using that in a game that I would then submit? I think I am getting insulted here.

I don't think anyone directly accused you of this, but there are certainly people who feel that reading this thread is blatant cheating, just as you feel that people who reload are blatantly cheating. Neither is discussed in the rules. I don't see how anyone can claim after reading this thread that they didn't glean some information from it. You happen to feel that reloading is the worst thing anyone can do. We were simply pointing out that other actions which you have performed could be construed as cheating. The point wasn't "we think jt cheated" it was "these issues weren't covered in the rules, so accusations of cheating are unwarranted."

In the CivFanatics tournament, reading the submission thread is clearly disallowed by the rules. Perhaps it should be the same here.

Finally, in regard to multiplayer, I play PBEM and my thoughts were directed to that. In PBEM reloading is the prime method of cheating. Anyone who would reload in this tourney would surely reload in PBEM competition.

Well, that's quite a stretch. How do you get from "reloads, and tells everyone they did it" to "reloads, so they must be a dirty rotten cheater and they'll definitely cheat in multiplayer"?

[jet_y]

culural victory

I enjoyed the game, here my win.

Ignore the messages, just press next turn.

thanks and regards jet_y