MULTIPLAY : The GameLeague is dead , The Battlefield lifes !!!!!

[MarkyMark]

Battlefield is a good thing

Sure you are right. Rushbuying can destroying a Game.
But a really good Player never use this!!!!!
And the Clan are a fair one, we are fair Player and we want fun. This is the Content for The Battlefield. Take a look you will like it.
When another men plays unreal (much buildings and much units) he will be disbanded from the Battlefield
Maybe we can make a rule to disband Wonders in League Games, this will be weaken the Rush buy trick but in Ladder its free for all .
Come enter and play with us:
http://ctp2.the-battlefield.com
Thank you MarkyMark

[Dinner]

Re: Battlefield is a good thing

Originally posted by MarkyMark
Sure you are right. Rushbuying can destroying a Game.
But a really good Player never use this!!!!!

These is simply not true. A good player, like a good general, will take advantage of all of his availible resources. I rutinely use rush buy to confound and consternate my opponents during MP play; rather then say a "good player" never uses rush buy it would be more correct to say a "good player" knows when to use or not use rush buy.

[MarkyMark]

A Game has his rules

A Game has his rules and this rules are valued for all Players.
A good Player will win within this rules not outside this Rules. Then the Truth is:
When he wins Games outside this Rules, he lost really.....This is the truth, surely he can do he plays fair but he knows himself he havent won really. And our Rule is no using this Bug!!!!
And this is for everyman.
And Remember:
CTP2 is just a game not more with talk and fun. I like this, winning isn`t so important for me.
Greetings Mark.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Locutus
Yes, that would seem like a very useful trick. But as stankarp pointed out, just creating a fix (which is easy enough, simply disabling rush-buy during the opponents turn does the trick, as posted above) isn't enough, you also have to somehow ensure that all players are actually using the code, that's a lot trickier...

I think we can't seperate the players field without this fix and with the fix, so the only sollution would be a code that detects the number rush buy events and point out if this event occurs more than once in a single city during the opponents turns. So a slic spy function, that should also work if it is just on one computer installed. Yeah an alert box that pops up if someone rushed bought an item too much:

HUMAN_PLAYER_CHEATS "Sir, a most troubling developement has occured: {player[0].leader_name} has cheated by exploiting the infinite builds bug."

That should be a nice message espeacily if the cheater receives the message, too.

-Martin

[Locutus]

That's a brilliant idea, Martin We'll probably need to test if it'll actually works in MP (I have no idea how SLIC code behaves in MP games) but I think that might just work...

[Martin Gühmann]

I ran into trouble with all the begin turn events, obviously most of them are only used for AI civs, and it looks that in SP the Barbarians have the first turn in MP it looks that there turn is the last of all players, that resulted that nice bug in GoodMod about Shadow reported in Cradle, recently.

-Martin

[Locutus]

I suppose something like this would do the trick (untested):

HandleEvent(BuyFront) 'LOQ_KillRushBuyBug' post {
   if (g.player != city[0].owner) {
      player[0] = city[0].owner;
      MessageAll('LOQ_KillRushBuyBug_M');
   }
}

Alertbox 'LOQ_KillRushBuyBug_M' {
   Text(ID_LOQ_KILL_RUSHBUY_BUG);
}

// LOQ_KILL_RUSHBUY_BUG "&ltMartin's message&gt"

[Martin Gühmann]

From my observation I got the suspicion that the RushBuy (when a building is added to the city and not when the button is pressed) event occurs after your turn. So you have really count the number of rush buy events in acertain city of a player during the opponents turn.

Therefore I think if someone rush bought somethging in his turn without cheating, he will be blamed that he rush bought something, but if the event occurs a second time the same city although he hadn't a turn in in the meantime than it is cheating.

-Martin

[Locutus]

Yes, BuyFront activates at the start of the turn of the next player. However, city[0].owner doesn't change so the player who gets the blame is still the guilty one (I tested this).

Still needs to be tested during an MP game though...

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Locutus
Still needs to be tested during an MP game though...

LOL Ben and I tried this a couple of minutes ago. It was quite an amusing experience (neither of us had ever played MP before) but since neither of us could recreate the rush-buy bug we just gave up. I think some SLICer(s) should try again with some more experienced MPer(s) sometime soon, together I'm sure we can figure it out...

Edit: D'oh! I already see several mistakes in the approach me and Ben took. Too bad Ben's not online anymore. Oh well, better luck next time...

[Peter Triggs]

Well, I'm back in the land of the living.

Locutus, glad you got the point. I wasn't very clearheaded when I wrote that, didn't even get Pedrunn's name right.

This is looking good, but like you say it really needs to be tested in a multiplayer environment. Hopefully some multiplayer volunteers will come forward.

[child of Thor]

OK thats the gauntlet thrown, so what do i need to download/ change in the text files etc to help out?I will only be able to test the LAN TCP/IP multiplayer mode though, will this matter.
Oh please bare in mind that i'm newish to all this text file jiggery-pokey so give me the instruction's nice and easy!!! Oh yeah does it matter what kind of CTP2 i test it on? Vanilla+1.1patch/Craddle 1.2/MedMod etc?
(I hope i can help - and not the other way round )

[Locutus]

Peter,
Welcome back. I guess that was the flush of victory

Child of Thor,
I very much appreciate the offer but it would help an awful lot if you had ICQ or something, then we could communicate the details before and during testing. I suppose email, forums and the in-game chat will do, but you'd have to agree in advance to be online and working on testing the code at the same time. However, the earliest I have time for this again is probably Sunday, so I'm afraid I'm gonna have to leave this to someone else to test. What needs to be tested AFAICS is the following:

1. A game without extra code, to try and recreate the bug and see it in action (only if any of the testers are SLICers without experience with the bug).
2. A game where only the host has the anti-cheat code, to see for which players rush-buying is prevented and if the warning message is displayed properly.
3. A game where a single non-host player has the code, to test the same things as with 2.
4. A game where all non-host players have the code, to test the same as with 2 (could be merged with 3).
5. A game where all non-host players have the code, to confirm that noone can exploit the bug.

The test probably need to be performed on the original game, to ensure differences in modifications don't affect the test results. The code that needs to be tested is the following:

in scenario.slc:

trigger 'TestMultiplayerPatch1' on "BuildEditorWindow.RushBuyButton" when (1) {
tmpPlayer=city[0].owner;
if (g.player!=tmpPlayer) {
    return STOP;
   }
}

trigger 'TestMultiplayerPatch12' on 
   "ControlPanelWindow.ControlPanel.ControlTabPanel.CityTab.TabPanel.RushBuyButton"
   when (1) {
int_t tmpPlayer;
tmpPlayer=city[0].owner;
if (g.player!=tmpPlayer) {
    return STOP;
   }
}


trigger 'TestMultiplayerPatch13' on 
   "CityWindow.Globals.Tabs.QueueTab.TabPanel.RushBuyButton" when (1) {
tmpPlayer=city[0].owner;
if (g.player!=tmpPlayer) {
    return STOP;
   }
}

trigger 'TestMultiplayerPatch14' on 
   "CityStatusWin.TabGroup.Tab2.TabPanel.RushBuyButton" when (1) {
tmpPlayer=city[0].owner;
if (g.player!=tmpPlayer) {
    return STOP;
   }
}

HandleEvent(BuyFront) 'LOQ_KillRushBuyBug' post {
   if (g.player != city[0].owner) {
      player[0] = city[0].owner;
      MessageAll('LOQ_KillRushBuyBug_M');
   }
}

Alertbox 'LOQ_KillRushBuyBug_M' {
   Text(ID_LOQ_KILL_RUSHBUY_BUG);
}

and in scen_str.txt:
LOQ_KILL_RUSHBUY_BUG "Sir, a most troubling developement has occured: {player[0].leader_name} has cheated by exploiting the infinite builds bug."

I hope I got all this right, it's already pretty late over here and I'm tired...

[child of Thor]

Hi Locutus! Sorry for 'that' thread, hmmmm....i think i wasn't thinking too clearly!
Anyway onto this thread. I've got a nasty firewall at work(which is where i get access to this site) so i can't partake of any multiplayer games over the net. However i DO have access to quite a few computers that myself and a few friends play CTP2 on.
So i don't think i can help in the way you were wanting(as you and IW tried the other day). But what i was offering was that if you gave me a set of instructions to follow(which is above yes?) then myself and a mate can play through in multiplayer(local) to test it out.
So this is what i've got:

Load origional CTP2 only(official patch Y/N?) - i guess yes.
try to replicate 'rush buy' bug.
add/edit above SLIC to relevent place.
try to replicate bug/ as host as not host - watch for other strange things.

Sound ok? I think i'll be able to test on friday night/Sat morning and come up with some comments. Is this usefull and are the instructions above complete to try?

[Dinner]

Re: A Game has his rules

Mark,
I am not speaking about using the bug I am speaking about utilizing a valid feature of the game. There is a very pronounced difference...

Originally posted by MarkyMark
A Game has his rules and this rules are valued for all Players.
A good Player will win within this rules not outside this Rules. Then the Truth is:
When he wins Games outside this Rules, he lost really.....This is the truth, surely he can do he plays fair but he knows himself he havent won really. And our Rule is no using this Bug!!!!
And this is for everyman.
And Remember:
CTP2 is just a game not more with talk and fun. I like this, winning isn`t so important for me.
Greetings Mark.