Reloading

[Gary Thomas]

This topic is closely related to that of saving and restoring games, something I am currently coding. However, it has wider implications, so I thought a separate thread was called for.

One of the dominant characteristics of the Civilization game is that you switch off the preserve random seed flag, and then reload each time you lose a battle, until you win.

Is this a desirable characteristic?

I am rather inclined to always preserve the random seed. So the only reason to reload is to change your own decisions. In Civilization you could still influence outcomes by changing the order in which battles are fought. That option is not available in Clash.

I would be interested to hear people's opinions on this area.

Cheers

[Mark_Everson]

Hi Gary, glad to hear your back at coding! Polygons can't be far off now!

I personally don't care to cheat, and a persistent seed is fine by me.

OTOH a lot of people seem to get part of their jollies from reloading and other silly past-times. Since it's trivial to give them the option to cheat (FE by changing the seed after a re-load) maybe we should allow it if enough people want it. If so I'd consider it a far-future thing. If its useful for debugging or something then it could be done sooner.

[LDiCesare]

I'm personnally against reloading: Keep the seed. (In fact, I'm also against reloading a game from a point back in time (I play 'ironman' 99% of the time), so I wouldn't mind a system like Nethack where the save files are erased when you open them. But then most people don't want that...)
Keep the seed. Even though some like to cheat, they usually enjoy the game much more when they don't have to. If they can't, they spend their time thinking instead of saving/reloading like crazy. Also note that, if they want to cheat, they can always try a slightly different move, which will make the order in which the rolls are made be different. So, keeping the seed won't hurt that much anyway.

[Fosse]

No matter how much your game appeals to the "hardcore" gamers, there are going to be people who are annoyed to no end by the same results on reloads.

I love ironmans, but Civ 3 had an uproar before they made the random seed optional.

The beauty of cheat modes and reload abuse is that it is the one thing that is truly optional in a game like this: if it feels like cheating, and you don't want to cheat, don't do it.

Let reloading change the seed, and you will satisfy those who want the game to "feel" random each time they reload, while continuing to ironman it yourself. Don't, and turn a few people off to the game, having them quit in frustration when Clash's equivalent of "spearman beats tank" rears its head once or twice.

[LDiCesare]

The beauty of cheat modes and reload abuse is that it is the one thing that is truly optional in a game like this: if it feels like cheating, and you don't want to cheat, don't do it.

No. When I play a game, save, do some stuff and the game crashes afterwards, I like to be able to replay and get the same results. So whatever we do, keeping the seed must be an option.

[Fosse]

Agreed.

Keeping the seed should be an option, but so should getting rid of it. Now any player can have it their way.

and the game crashes afterwards

Hold on now... it's going to crash!?!

[yellowdaddy]

i can't imagine why anybody could be bothered to reload just to win a battle.

however if the game is to have a political dimension that Civ doesn't have then it could be interesting to reload just to see the consequences of different political choices (to me anyway, but i'm a nerd!)

[Gary Thomas]

As a fanatical reloader who doesn't have the willpower to not cheat (my record is 1200 reloads before the native village produced the settler I wanted), I think the reload option should preserve the seed to control people like me.

The complaints about civ3 were simply because civ2 did not preserve it. We are starting with a clean slate and can always preserve the seed. Also, we have a simultaneous movement system which will work against the blatant cheating of civ.

The spearman beats tank scenario will not happen because:

1. The spearman would always lose, but

2. They will not exist at the same time - upgrading is automatic

Cheers

[Fosse]

Right, but it is likely that fans will find something that RARELY happens, denounce it as unfair or unrealistic, and start claiming that it happens to them nine times out of ten, making it Clash's analogy to spear vs. tank.


I realize that Clash's system makes reloading just to win a battle far less likely to actually help the player, with multiple battles per turn. But if that's how somebody likes to enjoy their game, why not at least throw them that bone.

When I play Clash I will never micromanage. Hate it. Don't want it. I'd also be the first to say that you should be able to micromanage if you want to (this is different than Civ 3 where you either micromange or run the least efficient country ever). Why take that away from those who like it?

Regardless of what you decide to go with, I'll be eager for it. I don't honestly know that someone who is interested in the game would throw a fit about reloads being "stacked." But maybe 1% of the players would quit because of that, and tell their friends to stay clear. Maybe.

I'm going to bed.