So Who is the best at CTP??? - A contest, ENTER NOW!

[yoda]

PBEM

Here is an interesting problem: How are you going to prevent the PBEM players from viewing their enemy's positions? I have only tried the email version once or twice, but I noticed that if I opened the email I am suppose to send to an opponent, I could enter and review his position without anyone else knowing. There is a HUGE cheat potential when playing with this option. Has this problem been solved? Also, what is stopping someone from making a copy of the saved game and opening it with an editor to review? Playing online solves this problem for the most part.

[Gavrushka]

Yoda, everything is debatable except for the rush buy switching, if you had followed what had happened here over the last 12 months, you would not even mention it... Unfortunately this aint a democracy - Solver is Boss.

[Gavrushka]

Re: PBEM

Originally posted by yoda
Here is an interesting problem: How are you going to prevent the PBEM players from viewing their enemy's positions? I have only tried the email version once or twice, but I noticed that if I opened the email I am suppose to send to an opponent, I could enter and review his position without anyone else knowing. There is a HUGE cheat potential when playing with this option. Has this problem been solved? Also, what is stopping someone from making a copy of the saved game and opening it with an editor to review? Playing online solves this problem for the most part.

All games will be online no PBEM - it would be too slow anyway, and yes, if a player is dishonest then it is a massive cheat, the worst of them all.. But I like to think that no one will even consider cheating. But all games will still be moderated saves checked turn by turn, and in the event someone tries to cheat they will not get away with it. That I absolutely promise you. Remember this site is kind of official, and there are a lot of resources here.

[C-MATRIX]

"The End of the World is near"

The 4 reasons I have, to prefer PBEM in comparison to Internet game:
1/ I have enough time to take care about everything I consider important for every turn.
2/ I don’t have to stay on Internet and be unavailable for the people who need to speak to me by phone (I don’t have two lines), and off course I can make calls without the need to switch off the line before that.
3/ I don’t like the situation of moving units and sliders for 30 min and then loose all that state in the game, just because of the unstable Internet connection ( I had only one internet game till now, but experienced that problem at least 7-8 times for the first 30 turns)
4/ I don’t like the idea of spending time and money to reconnect every time when the connection is dropped ( I don’t think there is a value for money to get fast IDSL, HDSL or cable connection, considering (amount of MB/30 days) as a criterion to compare both situations).

Why many Internet players don’t like PBEM?
I think, mainly because:
1/ They like fast games (similar to the real time games, what CTP isn’t ).
2/ They don’t like the idea that some body could watch their turns.

If watching the opponent’s turns is considered cheating, I wonder how did you prevent that in PBEM games, which are already ranked?
If you haven’t done proper checking (if possible) for those games, then you have basically already accepted that kind of cheating in the PBEM Ranking system.
And if so, there are only two ways:
1/ You either discontinue the PBEM ranking
OR
2/ Accept that, watching opponent’s turn isn’t a cheating.

In my personal opinion, cheating in CTP games is definitely when somebody change something in the game (Using methods and controls, which are not part of the original screen menus of the game) at the time before, during or after his first turn and that influence the normal run of the game.
I am not sure about watching opponent turns as far as any player can do it, so no body has an advantage of that.
In my games I don’t do it because I still don’t play for ranking and generally I don’t care if somebody watch my position because I don’t consider it secret.
If I play for ranking in PBEM, I shell need either solid control over watching player turns (for example password protection), or acceptance that any one is allowed to do it.

“1 on 1” Ranking System (Analysis)

1/ If there is not time limit for playing a turn, then any game could last foreverJ
I think keeping 24 hr rule should stay (or even be decreased).
2/ I looked at the PBEM and Internet rankings and saw that we have 48 members in PBEM list and 17 members in the Internet list. Some of those players appeared in both records. That means that probably we won’t have more then 60-70 participants in “1 on 1” competition.
3/ If every player should have a game with the rest of the competitors then the competition will be doomed to last forever.
If the total number of games is N and the number of players is M, then
N=M(M+1)/2 –M [games]
If M=60 then N=1770 games (obviously we can’t afford such competition)
More realistically, if M= 64 players we could have only 63 games to solve the problem “Who is the Best?”.
In that situation the 64 players will have:
Round 1 >> 32 games
Round 2 >> 16 games
Round 3 >> 8 games
Round 4 >> 4 games
Round 5 >> 2 games
Round 6 >> 1 game
Every round all pairs of players will have a map equal for all pairs.
Every different round the map will be different. So we need 6 different maps.
All games in every round will start at the same moment and have to finish for maximum of “X” turns. I think the number of turns shouldn’t be bigger then 80, because if we play 10 turns per week it is still 4 weeks per round. That makes 1 year to solve the problem. The map should be small or regular again because of the time limit and we should have 2 AI to have bigger resistance during the game, so we wouldn’t have much free area to go building hundreds of cities before to meet on the map.
In 80 turns we either will have a winner and a dead player, or we shell look at the difference in the points according to the Activision original system (or the Power graph).
I think we shouldn’t use symmetrical maps because in one turn you get 2,4 or more times information about the map depend on the type of symmetry and the game will be boring.
I offer you to play simultaneously 2 games on the SAME MAP where every player of any pair will play as a first player in one of the games and as a second player in the other game. Every turn will be served from the moderator of the game and every played turn will be sent only to the moderator from both players and has to be played for particular time (24 hr for example). When the moderator receives turn “N” from both players then he swaps the results and sent them back to the players for turn “N+1”.
In this way there is no need for symmetrical map and every player can play as a first from first location and as a second from the second location.
The result of those two games will be the average of them.
If in one of those two simultaneous games there is a winner and a dead player, then obviously the ”Killer” will be the winner of both games.
So, if one of the games finishes before T80 with a “Killing event” there is no need to continue the other one.
If there isn’t a “Killer” in no one of both games to T80, then the average score of both games will show the winner.
The looser gets nothing (If we need only to find out who is the winner of 64 players)
If you want we can have games for second and third place also.

So, “There can be only One” and he must be the winner of all 6 rounds.

[Gavrushka]

The Competition is not open to all, it is invitational, the rules will be set by Solver, the competition will be held on line. Your post is a little out of place I think!!

[Solver]

Lots of posts here over the last hours.

Rules are defined by me indeed, but I will coordinate them with Gav.

As of now, I see it that we should not allow piracy. This is because piracy is not only unbalanced, but there are some known bugs associated with it.

May I ask who's that filix guy .

Gav, I'm curious as to how do we technically establish moderation? Is it possible to have a player during a game that can observe everything, or what?

[drAgON1]

I agree with the SOL's bombing rule. However I think this map will be set up as Huge or Gig so tech should take you to modern before SOLs can really become a threat.

[blackice]

There is a HUGE cheat potential

While that is true Yoda and reality is people do and people are warned and expelled for it.

You have to admit it offers a certain challenge in it's own right though. Spies everywhere man play like there are. The diplomacy is the real art here and the main meat and potatos of the fun.

[Patryn]

Hey, this is Patryn. I am all for it if you will have me.

[Gavrushka]

Patryn, good to see you, this is gonna be some comp... There are some superb Players now!!!

[faded glory]

500 USD? Holy hell...

umm ok. Bu why werent any special traits of mine in the news? Well I see, Swssy is good ith stealth, Gav is productive, Berx is science?

And faded.....um faded....

1)Great at hording Gold and Big cities
2)Can spit 9 feet...thats right! nine
3)Is a womanizer...
4)Drinks Killians
5)Has a collection of missing work pens!


Hey! Why leave me out?

Your goin down Gav, I hope your head is labeled 'head' and legs as such. Cause we might have to re-attach them after Im through with ya.

[faded glory]

did i mention i can attack like a madman? And defend with much tenacity...

[Swissy]

I'll play.

I am so good with stealth cause many Net players exclude those units as they don't want to be bothered with defending against them. I think I am just a step below the best in every other aspect of the game. My biggest CTP fault is thinking I can play almost any start position, except all tundra or all desert. Most of my loses come from accepting marginal start positions and then finding out my opponent has rivers running thru his mountains and is churning out a dozen calvary a turn.

[Gavrushka]

Sorry Faded, I did not mean to be disrepsectful... I was going to add, that and Faded will bore you to death, as his warrior regurgitates insults from the depths of his depraved memory, as Leviathans swarm round the base of the tree he is hiding in...

Faded is a good defender, and will try to use the natural terrain to his advantage, and wait for the opponent to show his weakness.

Swissy is my nemesis... His play style is vastly different to anyone I have played before, he is patient and ever so calm, using Stealth Units, and one other little tactic you will just have to discover that will frustrate the life out of you... I will just say he found a way to level the playing field even if you g#have a massive unit number superiority.

BTW I think cookies don't work for this site as they did on the previous one.... Am I the Only sad git with a memory for such things, even though I only used it once over a year ago??

[faded glory]

ya....somebody stole my cookies too.


Solver you basterd