What Rules (Metagame) Do We Play With?

[snoopy369]

Please discuss what sort of outside-of-game-mechanics rules you wish to play under. Civ4 certainly has less opportunity for exploits than Civ3 did, but that doesn't mean it is entirely free of such things. Thank goodness there's no need for a combat report any more (as fun as those could be to write, especially on the winning end )

I'm going to leave the suggesting of rules entirely up to you all, as I don't know a lot about exploits at the current patch level.

The only things i'm going to pretty much require be in the rules are:

1. Provision for Challenging Rules Violation: Any team captain, who feels that another player or team has violated any of the rules here, or any basic standard of conduct, shall communicate with the Game Mods, currently Snoopy369 and Aeson, through private messages, the alleged misconduct.
The Game Mods shall determine appropriate action to repair said misconduct if it is determined to have happened.
The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, without consultation with the teams, including:

• Requiring the re-play of a turn, under appropriate restrictions
• Re-playing a turn for a team

The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, upon consultation with the team captains, including:[*] Requiring one team to compensate, in-game, another, either through financial compensation, land, military, or any other appropriate means, to rectify a wrong[/list]
The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, upon consultation with ACS administration and the team captains, including:

• Removing an individual player from the game
• Removing a team from the game

2. General Conduct of Players and Teams

• Players are expected to conduct themselves with dignity and respect for others at all times. They must remember that they are representing not only their team, but the Apolyton forums, when they post.
• Posts should always be constructive, politely worded, and should never be insulting or derogatory to other posters, or other teams-as-people. Derogatory statements about other posters are never okay, regardless of the 'spirit of fun' they may be made in. Discussing the finer points of a Civ4 Civ's downfall is fine, and expected; but discussing a poster's heritage, or a team's, is not acceptable.
• Teams are responsible for their players' posts. Any time a player posts in the public fora (or sends a PM or email), that player is posting as a representative of their team. It is the expectation of the Team Captains to police their members, and ensure that they post within this policy and reasonable standards of decorum. If a Team Captain is unable to prevent a player from posting inappropriately, it is his or her responsibility to bring that up with the Mods or with the Forum Administration as appropriate.
• Finally, this game is intended for all of the players to have fun. It is inevitable that disagreements will occur, and military strife in game will end up stressing the relationships of the players, but in the end, this is a game, and intended to be enjoyable for all involved. While having fun, please keep in mind the sensitivity of others.

I realize that's a lot, and it's sort of a downer, but after C3CDG I think it needs to be stated up front, and clearly, for all players.

Other rules should hopefully be more succinct and more game-related; things like 'no reloads' would be appropriate.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Can I suggest we name the polls either SPDG or MPDG please for ease of my surfing.

I believe there were sets of rules for the multi-site demogames that were adequate?

From another demogame:

MZO Conquests Democracy Game Pledge


As the leader and representative of my team, I give you, the other leaders and team members in the game, the following promise:

I, and my team, hereby promise that we will fully abide by the rules and the spirit of the rules in this multi-team democracy game.

We will not play ahead or abuse the game save in any manner. We will not use the game save in any way to view another team's position.

We will not attempt to enter or view any private forums. We will not fabricate e-mails or other forms of messaging or falsify our identities in any fashion.

We agree not to communicate with another team in any meaningful way regarding the game until that team is actually contacted in the game. Minimaps, or other similar re-creations providing a teams location in the world, will not be traded until maps can actually be traded in the game.

We will not engage in any double identity or double log-in activity, nor will we condone it. If we become of aware of such activity, it will be made public to all teams immediately. Any members engaging in such activity will be banned from ALL teams involved in the game. Any information revealed by a double identity player will be made known to the other team involved, and the neutral administrator, and appropriate compensation, as either agreed by the teams, or if agreement is not possible, as determined by the neutral administrator, will be provided.

I agree to create and maintain a current members list in a public area of the forum.

We will do our best to quickly complete our turns and make the save available for the next team prior to the deadline. This deadline is 24 hours per team per turn.

In the case of game process issues and disputes, we agree to acknowledge and abide by the ruling of the neutral adminstrator. The neutral administrator for this game will be Octavian X or his designate, who will not be, and will not have been, a member of a team in the game.

In addition, we agree to allow the administrator access to our private forum provided by MZO for the purpose of acting as game historian.

We agree to never engage in game activities that exploit faults in the game. A list of known explots may be found here.

Furthermore, we will expell anyone from our team who willingly breaks these rules.

[snoopy369]

One additional question. Should there be a rule regarding external fora? The game admins are being granted access here in part to ensure a fair game; now that we have private fora, should external (non-apolyton) fora be restricted from use, or at least be required to have adminstrative access; or is this not a big deal?

[Krill]

Outside fora may well be used, and I see no reason to disallow their use if the admins are notified of their use, and given access.

It would make sense to me for another forum to be created for the admins, to work along the same lines as the UN in the ISDG, where treaties are sent to after they are ratified, and other correspondance between teams and the admins can be kept.

[Dominae]

Re: What Rules (Metagame) Do We Play With?

Originally posted by snoopy369
The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, without consultation with the teams, including:

• Requiring the re-play of a turn, under appropriate restrictions
• Re-playing a turn for a team

The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, upon consultation with the team captains, including:[*] Requiring one team to compensate, in-game, another, either through financial compensation, land, military, or any other appropriate means, to rectify a wrong[/list]
The Game Mods shall be empowered to take action, upon consultation with ACS administration and the team captains, including:

• Removing an individual player from the game
• Removing a team from the game

Just to clarify: what do you mean by "consultation"? Do you mean that you will hear everyone's opinion but that your verdict is final, or that there will be some sort of democratic (or other) process?

If 6/8 teams want to, say, replay a turn, will you be obliged to go along with it, or can you veto if you feel it's necessary?

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Krill
Outside fora may well be used, and I see no reason to disallow their use if the admins are notified of their use, and given access.

It would make sense to me for another forum to be created for the admins, to work along the same lines as the UN in the ISDG, where treaties are sent to after they are ratified, and other correspondance between teams and the admins can be kept.

We'll use an e-mail address for such, probably not admin forums.

[snoopy369]

Re: Re: What Rules (Metagame) Do We Play With?

Originally posted by Dominae


Just to clarify: what do you mean by "consultation"? Do you mean that you will hear everyone's opinion but that your verdict is final, or that there will be some sort of democratic (or other) process?

If 6/8 teams want to, say, replay a turn, will you be obliged to go along with it, or can you veto if you feel it's necessary?

I'd like to get Aeson's input on this; and I certainly want you all to reach something on this that you all are happy with.

The reason I broke the decisions down like that, was mostly to make it clear that I didn't see our position to be judge, jury, and executioner; rather, we should make small decisions ourselves, but bring bigger decisions to the table. This is your game, not mine or Aeson's, from the gameplay point of view; therefore, any decision we make should be one that most people are happy with, and is fair and just.

I, personally, would say that it shouldn't be a case where 6/8 teams necessarily decide things 100%, but that we'd have to have a significant reason to go against such a super-majority; I couldn't imagine any reasonable scenario where i'd want to decide against that sort of agreement.

That said, I don't want to write things off as impossible, either; but certainly, if Aeson and I made a decision that went against the majority (say, a 4-3 majority), I'd expect that we have a good explanation for why we feel that this is fair.

Don't forget, though, that we might have information we cannot share with all teams about any given situation; depending on the severity of the infraction, it may not be serious enough to justify releasing confidential information to other teams, but that confidential information might change the 'right call'... hence why i'd suggest, myself, that the final call be in Aeson's and my hands, with the burden of explaining why we did what we did on us, perhaps after the fact if needed

[Aeson]

I think it should start (and hopefully end) with rules decided on by general concensus before the game starts, with the mods acting to enforce those rules. Specific rules are best, but general rules could also be decided on.

An example of a specific rule could be:

If a team has not played their turn within X hours, and hasn't been granted an exception, the penalty will be...

An example of a general rule could be:

If a team wishes to use a questionable tactic, they must first clear that use with the mods. If the mods feel the tactic is clearly within/outside the spirit of the competition (or has already been ruled on) then the tactic will be allowed/disallowed. If it is questionable to the mods, it will be voted upon by the general public. (If the team wishes it to go that far. They may determine that the use of the tactic would not cover the drawbacks of having their plans be revealed.) If the team fails to first get confirmation for questionable tactics, the mods will assess a penalty of X% the effect of the use of the tactic and/or require the turn to be replayed without the tactic by the offending team.

Hopefully general rules can cover most infractions. In the cases that they don't, I would suggest what snoopy has, that the mods be the final say (ie. a general rule about unforseen cases).

[Paddy]

looks balanced.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Aeson
Hopefully general rules can cover most infractions. In the cases that they don't, I would suggest what snoopy has, that the mods be the final say (ie. a general rule about unforseen cases).

I agree that this would be best. It's so hard to find disinterested teams or captains.

[Rcoutme2]

Given the nature of the "multi-player first" thinking designed into the game, most of the obvious exploits should have been taken out. I wonder, however, how we can prevent a team from double-taking a turn (not from the original, but from sending copies to other team mates...)? This has always been the biggest 'exploit' problem.

Perhaps, given the bad feelings of the last Civ III demo-game, we should put some sort of survival contingency plan in as well.

Just some thoughts, not really any 'requirements'.

[Krill]

It is never going to be possible to stop someone from abusing the save if they want to.

The Honour Code is the only way to go.

---

Now, I'll be blunt. If anything resembling the DL incident happens, the game for me will be toast. If an entire team hapened to feel the same way, then I would definately support that teams decision to leave the game, if they chose to do so. Forget a survival contingency plan, I would be more worried about the reprecussions within Apolyton as a whole.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

I will also be blunt !

Is it absolutely necessary for the continued bringing up of the other demo game ???

It was an unfortunate event indeed and those at fault have made their apologies and served there penalties, really is it necessary to regurgitate this at any and every opportunity ?

The Horde team will be honourable, play honourably just as we did last time !!!

[Krill]

Gee, doesn't someone have a sore spot.

I will also be blunt !

np.

Is it absolutely necessary for the continued bringing up of the other demo game ???

Look who brought up the issue. What team does he belong to again? The game hasn't even started yet, and members of BOH aren't happy with each others thoughts.

It was an unfortunate event indeed and those at fault have made their apologies and served there penalties, really is it necessary to regurgitate this at any and every opportunity ?

Yes, it is indeed an unfortunate event. It is so unfortunate that it shocked all of the Civ 3 demogaming community here. The apologies have been accepted. And as i just said, it was not I that 'regurgitated' this issue.

The Horde team will be honourable, play honourably just as we did last time !!!

And I said otherwise where...?


Look, Chris, pay attention to what I am about to say, because it is important: all teams are treated with respect, no matter their history. As will the individual posters. There is no need for any sore spot.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

OK fair nuff Krill but take a little time with your posts my dear fellow because your tone dont help sometimes !

All this being blunt and telling me to pay attention does'nt really wash my friend !

I dont actually have that sore a spot as you put it but you know very well the pressure that incident put on my team and the rest of the participants of that game, so tell me if you will whether you believe bringing it up at any opportunity by being blunt or insisting people pay attention to you is really that good for the Apolyton community ?