Final (private) Discussion: Bugs - Exploits - Cheats; What NOT to Allow

[miccofl]

I restarted the thread here in case some of you didn't want to go public with your comments. I would have copied the entire thread but that may have confused some people especially with the forum format changes I made :cute:

Should we agree to ratify the following list? Does it need additions or alterations? A UN vote will be coming soon and we need our poll first so lets finalize our ideas or the list will be polled for as it stands.

The following is a list of some known exploits. Note that these are not all the exploits, so if an exploit doesn't appear here, it is still illegal. The administator may edit this list as exploits are discovered/fixed.
1. Alliance tricks

Basically the idea of most points in this section revolves around two teams flipping back and forth between peace and war to abuse certain game mechanics.

1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers

Two (or more) teams can get double (triple...) use of bombardment units and Workers by using the units on their respective turns, then letting their "enemy" capture and use them in turn. When facing an alliance of two civs with 20 Catapults among them, it's quite disconcerting to have to face 40 rounds of bombardment.

The simple solution is to require alliances and peace treaties to be respected through in-game diplomacy.

1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource

Two teams can get the use of a single resource by repeated gifting and then cancelling of the trade. One Iron should only supply one civ at a time.

Repeated cancellation of trade is okay for supplying bursts of a resource for a civ upgrade, as long as it is not also being used for making a dual supply out of one resource.

1.3 Generating Leaders by sacrificing cheap units

A team can build a bunch of Warriors and let another team slaughter them with Elites, in hopes of generating a Great Leader. This is actually quite costly, but the results can be dramatic (fast Forbidden Palace or Palace) if the teams get lucky.

The solution to this one is the same as in 1.1.

1.4 Declaring war for happiness

Two teams can declare war on each other for purposes of generating a little Happiness, which can lead to increased production through WLTKD.

1.5 Exchanging map/minimap information before Astronomy.

In Conquests, map trading is pushed back to Astronomy. If two teams can exchange maps out-of-game, the Seafaring trait becomes a lot less attractive.


2. Metagame tricks

2.1 Reloading to alter unwanted random results

It is possible to alter the results of combat (even with preserve random seed turned on) by reloading the save and playing out the turn slightly differently (i.e. by attacking in a different order, or basically by playing around with things that trigger the RNG). This can result in finding highly one-sided battles, and the appearance of an inordinate number of Elites and Great Leaders.

The simple solution is to require each team to open the save only once. This means that only one sequence of moves/orders is allowed to be viewed per save.

2.2 Manipulating a savegame file

Crafty players use the PBEM savegames to obtain information, or worse.

Again, let's play Civ3. If we allow tools like MapStat, then the door is wide open for any other file-manipulation program, which is a can of worms.

2.3 Loading a save while zoomed out

A team's turn-player can configure his or her game to be zoomed out, then load a PBEM savegame, which can reveal certain facts about the previous team's location.

Solution: all teams must agree to zoom in before loading the savegame and/or zoom in before saving the game.

2.4 Renaming units/cities to confuse/mislead opponents

Cities can be renamed to names of techs ('Monotheism') or sums of Gold ('210 Gold') or anything else that can be traded in the diplomacy screen. This allows a team to screw over another in a very weird way.

Worker and Settler names can be interchanged to hide their identities in stacks (since their stats are the same). Units with identical stats can be renamed for the same effect (Enkidu Warriors and Spearmen, Ancient Cavalry and Gallic Swordsmen).

Units/cities, therefore, may not be renamed for the specific purpose of fooling opponents.


3. Game Mechanics tricks

3.1 Fortifying a ship without any movement points left to obtain extra vision radius

A ship that fortifies sees an extra 1 tile in all directions at the beginning of the next turn. This can be accomplished by waking up the passengers of a ship (if there are any), and giving the Fortify All order.

3.2 Hitting F1 to change production

It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and change production before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue. This can result in tech-enabled units and Wonders being completed the very turn the tech is researched, or production to be changed in response to an enemy's actions (like Walls if a stack moves toward a specific city and not another).

3.3 Using GoTo to get extra movement

The last civ in the turn order can issue a GoTo command to a unit, and have that unit move twice before the next turn begins. This is very strong in war-time, and benefits one team only.

3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war

A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that civ. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.

[Laser]

The list is fine to ratify, but I'd like to propose my anti-ICS rule of having a minimum of 2 tiles between each city. I don't know what the twin cities are, but I do know that our team has followed this rule anyways. The only teams that look ICSish are GWT and Apolyton in our current game. I don't think the game was intended to be played that way and I consider it as much of an exploit as anything.

[miccofl]

I don't really think the anti-ICS rule will fly. As for poly using a semi-ICS strategy; with all the jungle they had to deal with, one can't really blame them. The ICS strategy is flawed, it does favor the early game but late game production is stunted. My opinion is if a team wants to use it, it's their funeral. I really don't think the measure could pass here, but if another person agrees with you we can put it to a vote. :b:

What was to be the "twin-cities" is Boston and the future New Castle on the other side of the lake - only the lake separates them and they were to be a passage from the western seas to the eastern sea - just one tile of separation.

[miccofl]

Some possible additions:

Teams "joining" each other. A team likely to be defeated soon can gift all he has to another team. This can result in a dramatic shift of power. Should there be a limit?

Any espionage in form of trying to hack the secure team fora, continously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent´s team, hacking screenshot or savegame upload locations, etc. - we need some kind of punishment set up for this behavior, any suggestions? (Although Grenouille found out what happens to teams that spy.)

Team members switching teams. We will need guidelines although I think the present system where you can join any team your civ knew or a team that has contact with a civ that knows your civ.

[Trip]

Originally posted by Laser
The list is fine to ratify, but I'd like to propose my anti-ICS rule of having a minimum of 2 tiles between each city. I don't know what the twin cities are, but I do know that our team has followed this rule anyways. The only teams that look ICSish are GWT and Apolyton in our current game. I don't think the game was intended to be played that way and I consider it as much of an exploit as anything.
Your team will have violated that rule once the twin cities are in place. ;)

ICS or any form of it has advantages and disadvantages. Advantages include a maximum use of land available early in the game, more cities for more production and more unit support under Despotism and Monarchy. Disadvantages are that corruption is so high that your 2nd ring cities may be almost 1/3 to 1/2 corrupt depending on how you place them especially with the new Conquests corruption rules.

Plus, every team has that strategy available to them. Extreme ICS (1-tile placement) is really only effective for increasing score, like for CFC's hall of fame. The corruption generated by such a placement scheme is horrendous. I don't know if you've ever built a true ICS empire but you waste a TON of tiles with where your cities are planted and you lose even more productivity with fewer tiles available to work. If a team is willing to deal with the drawbacks of the strategy then I don't see a problem with them using it. Not that I believe any team will. The closest team to doing so would probably be Apolyton (depending on who their MoI is), and even then they would never use 1-tile placement. Cities placed 1 tile away from others are certainly the exception and not the norm.

As far as Apolyton using 2-tile placement (only one of our cities is placed in a pattern closer than that) when you start with fewer tiles of grassland than you get barbs out of bad huts you have to make some compromises to try and stay competitive. :p Should I become the MoI of this team you will see how truly powerful a 2/3-tile city placement scheme can be when used correctly. ;)

[Trip]

Some other things I think we should add to the list:

- Remaining at war with a team after being defeated (driven from home) by jumping across to the opposite side of the continent/planet or having a Settler on a Galley for the sole purpose of driving up that team's war weariness (preventing the use of governments which suffer from war weariness).

- What do we do about, say, trading embassy screenshots before Navigation (map trading)? Will teams be allowed to do espionage for each other with one at war and the other at peace (with the nation in question)?

- For all combats I propose teams have to submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. This will help reduce claims of cheating and will also be more realistic (why would you not be able to see who attacked you just because it's PBEM? The only reason this isn't implimented is because it would be too much work to program a replay into PBEM games).

[brian_the_bold]

holy cow..do you think we could get the teams to agree to that?

not just combat but the whole turn as you need that in a review to see what sets the RNG ...So a complete log of you whole turn would be required

that is what we have done and it works well and we know we can recreate exactly what happened by replaying any of our turn by fallowing the chat logs so a team log that the game addmin could review would be most helpfull and would stop any pointless finger pointing

I for one would strongly support this....

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by miccofl
Some possible additions:

Teams "joining" each other. A team likely to be defeated soon can gift all he has to another team. This can result in a dramatic shift of power. Should there be a limit?


There should be no limit.


For all combats I propose teams have to submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. This will help reduce claims of cheating and will also be more realistic (why would you not be able to see who attacked you just because it's PBEM? The only reason this isn't implimented is because it would be too much work to program a replay into PBEM games).

I am not against the log, or submitting it for review with a game admin, but I would be reserved against giving it to the team you attacked due to the RGN thing b_t_b mentions.

[Laser]

Yeah, the log is good, but should only be given to the admins.

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Trip
Some other things I think we should add to the list:

- Remaining at war with a team after being defeated (driven from home) by jumping across to the opposite side of the continent/planet or having a Settler on a Galley for the sole purpose of driving up that team's war weariness (preventing the use of governments which suffer from war weariness).

This issue is being discussed, but no firm wording has been reached.
/me sees a void that needs filling

Originally posted by Trip
- What do we do about, say, trading embassy screenshots before Navigation (map trading)?

One would think that would be forbidden unless the map was blacked out – this is one of those grey areas that will need exploration and discussion.

Originally posted by Trip
Will teams be allowed to do espionage for each other with one at war and the other at peace (with the nation in question)?

Are we allowed to do that now? To me that is part of the espionage game, but the subject hasn’t come up yet; it wasn’t discussed in the pre-game discussions. Although we may set precedent in the near future…

Originally posted by Trip
- For all combats I propose teams have to submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. This will help reduce claims of cheating and will also be more realistic (why would you not be able to see who attacked you just because it's PBEM? The only reason this isn't implemented is because it would be too much work to program a replay into PBEM games).

Well I don’t know how they do it anywhere else, but I do know that we are the only forum to grant the GA full access to our private area in the PTW ISDG. We have nothing to hide. He has access to our game chat logs, all polls and discussions, as well as every screenshot ever posted for the game. If every team followed this procedure, cheating would never be an issue.

[Trip]

I want the log just for each team's information (which they are rightly due to recieving), not even just to try and prevent cheating.

Like I said in my earlier post, the only reason we can't see all combats, etc. is because it was too much work for Firaxis/BreakAway to put a turn replay into the game for PBEM. Why should a team be completely in the dark about what actions its units were involved in?

I think we should at least bring the subject up (in its own thread).

[Dauphin]

OK, I can accept a list of unit attacks and outcomes, and of troop movements that should be visible. I don't think it necessary but is worth raising as a procedure.

I would worry about auditability in terms of completeness, accuracy, compliance and general disclosure on the part of the team providing that information. If we do this all teams must be commited to it and send all relevant information in the e-mail that has the game attached, else it could be more trouble than its worth*.

*I'd rather not know something than be given wrong information in a situation like this. e.g I'd rather lose a warrior to an unknown assailant than to be told I lost it to an elite swordsmen when its actually a conscript warrior, or vice versa. It would adversely effect my thinking, I think.

[Trip]

Well, the "battle log" would be an out-of-game facet of this competition, so if we can't trust teams to be honorable with the log then chances are we couldn't trust them in other out-of-game parts as well (loading other teams' saves, reloading to get better combat results, etc.).

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Trip
Well, the "battle log" would be an out-of-game facet of this competition, so if we can't trust teams to be honorable with the log then chances are we couldn't trust them in other out-of-game parts as well (loading other teams' saves, reloading to get better combat results, etc.).

There are two kinds of trust in this issue.

1) Trust them to be honest.
2) Trust them to be fastidious.

You can fail the 2nd kind of trust by forgetfulness or accident, and still not be considered a cheat.

My example was extreme to show a point, but errors (deliberate or accidental) in available information can lead to big differences in the way you deal with a situation.

[miccofl]

It would be best if everyone read the UN discussion on this, it is here. (http://cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/civ3/viewtopic.php?t=5080&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)

[Grungy]

Ifs its taking advantage of a glitch in the software of any kind it should not be allowed

[miccofl]

by Game Administrator Elucidus at the UN
Okay since the other guys are a no show how about this, teams have your list officially sorted in the following groups no later than Midnight on Sunday 11-Jan GMT.

(1) Agreed exploits
(2) Non-exploits
(3) Amendments to existing items (this is difficult and will require discussion amongst us all)
(4) Additions

I will be updating this post as/if our discussion progresses. All changes to our list need to be submitted and received by 10:00 PM GMT Sunday (5:00 PM EST)
Items in red are disputed, see section 2.
Items in green are to be amended, see section 3.

These are the agreed exploits:
(1) Agreed exploits (except where denoted by color)

0. General Rules

0.1. Team members

All teams must list their members publicly without exception.

0.2.a Out of game Espionage

Any espionage in form of trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent’s team, hacking screenshot or savegame upload locations, etc. is strictly forbidden. Any team involved in such activities should face severe consequences up to exclusion from the ISDG.

0.2.b Team membership

A person may only be member of one team. A double membership is considered espionage and the offending person will be banned from the ISDG.

0.3.a Team members switching teams

A team member may only switch to another team with the consent of both teams involved and also those teams that were in contact with the team he/she leaves.
Switching to a team in the other group should be allowed.

0.3.b Members of defeated teams

Similar rules as mentioned in a) might be applicable here.
But as we have a qualification round and then successive finals, we might also want to disallow members of a defeated team to join another team as "refugees".
A team should stay more or less as it is for both games.


1. Diplomacy and Alliance tricks

1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers

Two (or more) teams can get double (triple...) use of bombardment units and Workers by using the units on their respective turns, then letting their "enemy" capture and use them in turn. When facing an alliance of two civs with 20 Catapults among them, it's quite disconcerting to have to face 40 rounds of bombardment.
The simple solution is to require alliances and peace treaties to be respected through in-game diplomacy.

1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource

Two teams can get the use of a single resource by repeated gifting and then canceling of the trade. One Iron should only supply one civ at a time.
Repeated cancellation of trade is okay for supplying bursts of a resource for a civ upgrade, as long as it is not also being used for making a dual supply out of one resource.

1.3.a) Generating Leaders by sacrificing cheap units

A team can build a bunch of Warriors and let another team slaughter them with Elites, in hopes of generating a Great Leader. This is actually quite costly, but the results can be dramatic (fast Forbidden Palace or Palace) if the teams get lucky.

1.3.b) Generating Workers by sacrificing cheap units to Mayans

Similar to leaders, you can sacrifice units against a Mayan civ to generate more workers early one.

1.3.c) Provoking a GA by sacrificing cheap units to UU's

Don't provoke the GA for a friendly civ by "offering" a unit to kill.

1.4 Declaring war for happiness

Two teams can declare war on each other for purposes of generating a little Happiness, which can lead to increased production through WLTKD.

1.5. Contact to another civ before actual contact

Teams should not contact other teams for any in-game purpose until they have contact in the game.

1.6.a) Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation

In Conquests, map trading is pushed back to Navigation. If two teams can exchange maps out-of-game, the Seafaring trait becomes a lot less attractive.

1.6.b) Exchange of contact

Since you cannot really exchange contact, you can resort to simply telling that you live next to XX. A possible rule is to disallow a team to tell others about its neighbors before Printing Press.

1.7 Teams "joining" each other

A team likely to be defeated soon can gift all he has to another team. This can result in a dramatic shift of power and is especially powerful in the qualification game.
Another possibility is for one team gifting all but one city to another one to allow them to wipe out another team or two, so that both advance to the next round.
Therefore, gifting cities (and maybe techs and gold as well) is to be limited to a max of 3 cities per 20 turns and 1 city every 5 turns.

2. Metagame tricks

2.1 Reloading to alter unwanted random results

It is possible to alter the results of combat (even with preserve random seed turned on) by reloading the save and playing out the turn slightly differently (i.e. by attacking in a different order, or basically by playing around with things that trigger the RNG). This can result in finding highly one-sided battles, and the appearance of an inordinate number of Elites and Great Leaders.
This is considered cheating!

2.2 Manipulating a savegame file

Crafty players use the PBEM savegames to obtain information, or worse.
Again, let's play Civ3. If we allow tools like MapStat, then the door is wide open for any other file-manipulation program, which is a can of worms.

2.3 Loading a save while zoomed out

A team's turn-player can configure his or her game to be zoomed out, then load a PBEM savegame, which can reveal certain facts about the previous team's location.
Solution: all teams must agree to zoom in before loading the savegame and/or zoom in before saving the game.

2.4 Renaming units/cities to confuse/mislead opponents

Cities can be renamed to names of techs ('Monotheism') or sums of Gold ('210 Gold') or anything else that can be traded in the diplomacy screen. This allows a team to screw over another in a very weird way.
Worker and Settler names can be interchanged to hide their identities in stacks (since their stats are the same). Units with identical stats can be renamed for the same effect (Enkidu Warriors and Spearmen, Ancient Cavalry and Gallic Swordsmen).
Units/cities, therefore, may not be renamed for the specific purpose of fooling opponents.


3. Game Mechanics tricks

3.1.a) Fortify All

Anything relating to "Fortify all." This includes last player-fortifies stuff, as well as Fortifying a boat in waters at the end of a turn to increase its visibility in the coming turn at start. Just don't use the bloody command!

3.1.b) Fortify a boat passenger

Same as Fortify All a boat you can just fortify a unit in the boat for increased visibility next turn.

3.2.a) Hitting F1/back-forward to change production

It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and change production before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue. This can result in tech-enabled units and Wonders being completed the very turn the tech is researched, or production to be changed in response to an enemy's actions (like Walls if a stack moves toward a specific city and not another).

3.2.b) Hitting F1/back-forward for double tile usage

Furthermore, usage of F1 or back - forward buttons in the city view during the pre-turn production queue can be used to use the same tile by 2 or more different cities in the same turn.

3.3 Using Go To/Auto-Explore/Auto-Workers to get extra movement

The last civ in the turn order can issue a GoTo command to a unit, and have that unit move twice before the next turn begins. This is very strong in wartime.
Every civ has that option, that's why i wanted that no one use go-to.
And it's not that you got extra move-points with that, you only use the move-points for the next turn early -> mean 2 turns in 1 and 1 you can not move the unit.
Similar results can be achieved with auto-explore and auto-workers.

3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war

A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that civ. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.

3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness but not actual fighting

This is considered exploitative by some, but the game mechanics gradually decrease WW unless actual fighting or units in enemy borders is happening.
However, being kept in the game by a friendly civ with a single city for the SOLE purpose of inflicting WW to an opponent is questionable.

4. Miscellaneous

4.1 Punishment for breaking the rules

A: Exclusion of the team and all members from the game
For repetitive (proven!) cheating. For out of game spying. For repetitive breaking of several "minor" rules and ignoring the warnings of the admins.
B: Forfeiting a turn (admins skip the turn)
For exceeding the time limit. For repeated breaking of a minor rule (e.g. F1 double tile usage). For proven cheating. For ignoring multiple warnings from the admins.
C: Official warning from the game admins
For breaking a minor rule once or twice. For inappropriate use of language in the UN, in team negotiations (excluding RPG-type talk of course , etc.

4.2 Reputation and honor system

The admins should keep track of all official treaties and should set up a reputation system with no specifics but a simple level of "trustworthyness".

4.3.a) Unknown exploits

The teams agree to abide by the rulings of the admin council should a new, previously unknown (to everyone) exploit/bug appear in the game.

4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game!

4.4 Fairness Pledge

Every team must agree to a fairness pledge before the game starts.


Intersite 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 login 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 my home 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. The 24 hour rule notwithstanding, we acknowledge that a time counter will be used to time play, and all reasonable efforts will be made to play the turn within the constraints of the time counter, which provides 4 hours per turn per team, in aggregate fashion. Each team will start with a 'bank' of 100 hours.

In the case of game process issues and previously unknown exploits/bugs, we agree to acknowledge and abide by the ruling of the neutral administrator council. The neutral administrator council for this game will be Elucidus, Strider and Bootstoots from CDG, who will not be, and will not have been, a member of a team in the game.

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


We wish you all the best of luck and good civin'!

The non-exploits: (items in the main list that we feel do not belong there(from this thread and other discussions, If I missed your suggestion don't take offense, just post it again please. We have until Sunday to finalize our list.)
(2) Non-exploits
3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

This is not an exploit as it requires much time and thought as well as many naval units and therefore a significant resource expenditure to enable. If a team wishes to go through all the time and trouble required to set this up, let them do it.

The Amendments (changes to items on the list that we fell need to be made)
(3) Amendments to existing items
Section 0 should be revised as follows:


0.0 Regulating the out-of-game conduct

0.1 Membership regulations

0.1.a Membership Roster

All teams should maintain a public listing of their membership. The list should include at a minimum the name and city of the members. (This will stop many “witch-hunts” before they start and if necessary, simplifies the IP trace for the forum administrators.)

0.1.b Allowed Memberships

Each forum should be allowed to determine the requirements for membership of its team on its own. However, a person may only be member of one team. A double membership is considered espionage and the offending person will be banned from the ISDG. Any team that encourages or allows double membership activities should face severe sanction and/or consequences.

0.2 Switching Teams

0.2.a General

Switching teams between the two games should be allowed provided that the person is on only one team at a time. Switching between two active teams in the same game should be expressly forbidden.

0.2.b Membership Retention after Defeat

Team members chose their team before the game begins. They are subject to the pledge made by all teams to remain in the competition until the last game is played or their team has been removed from the competition due to early elimination in the first set of games. Once a team has been eliminated from any further competition in the series, then and only then may its members be considered refugees.

0.2.c Refugees

Once the requirements for refugee status have been fulfilled, refugees may join another team provided that their team had in-game contact with the team they wish to join or the team they wish to join has/had in-game contact with at least two teams that had in-game contact with the defeated team.

0.3 Out-of-Game Espionage

0.3.a Intentional Espionage

Any espionage in form of trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent’s team, hacking screenshot or savegame upload locations, etc. is strictly forbidden.

0.3.b Inadvertent or Accidental Espionage

All teams and their members are allowed to visit/view any other team’s public areas. An accidental viewing of a private area due to a security hole or other bug in the forum’s software should not be considered a deliberate act provided the following conditions are met:
1. The member must have exited the private area immediately upon such discovery (it is up to each forum to clearly label its private areas.)
2. The member must privately inform his team leader of the incident, the team leader must put the member in contact with one of the Game Administrators and the member must give to the Game Administrator the particulars of the incident (how it happened, how much was seen, etc.)
The Game Administrator should then inform the violated team of its security hole and by which team, then determine what action if any should be taken against the member. Action to be taken should not exceed a 50 turn exclusion of the member from the game.


Section 1.6 should be revised as follows:
1.6.a Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation

No maps of any kind may be traded before the requisite technology of Navigation has been researched. This is inclusive of photographs, drawn maps, minimaps or embassy screenshots. A verbal description is acceptable.

Section 1.6.b should be revised as follows:
1.6.b Exchange of contact
No team may trade or broker contact between other teams until the requisite tech of Printing Press has been researched. A simple statement to team Z that we live next to team X is allowable so long as no transactions are made or brokered between the two, treated as a rumor.

Section 3.7 should be revised as follows:
3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness by evasion

Remaining at war with a team after being defeated (driven from home) by jumping across to the opposite side of the continent/planet or having a Settler on a Galley for the sole purpose of driving up that team's war weariness (preventing the use of governments which suffer from war weariness).

Our additions: (from this thread and other discussions, If I missed your suggestion don't take offense, just post it again please. We have until Sunday to finalize our list.)
(4) Additions

4.2.a Battle Log – Issues created by luck or the RNG

For all combats, teams must submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. This will help reduce claims of cheating and will also be more realistic.

Why would you not be able to see who attacked you just because it's PBEM? The only reason this isn't implemented is because it would be too much work to program a replay into PBEM games. -Trip

alternative I agree with Trip in principle but I think my alternative resolves the issues as well and will stand a better chance of passage -miccofl
4.2.a Battle Log – Issues created by luck or the RNG

For any turn in which there is a combat, the team initiating that combat must submit or otherwise provide to the Game Administrators, a log of all unit movements and battles for that turn and the order that they were played.


last editited by miccofl January 9, 11:05 AM GMT

[Laser]

I agree with the green and red. Looks good to me. What teams think that the boat trick is an exploit?

There is one addition I would like to make though. No gifting of cities to teleport units: period. You can gift a city, if that is a permanent gifting......see our ISDG for details. :rolleyes:

I don't think the makers of the game intended for you to be able to "teleport" your forces.

[Trip]

Couple more things I discussed with miccofl on AIM:

A ban on gifting cities to another civ who doesn't have any adjacent cities (so you can't save a team by gifting them a city on the opposite side of the world, but you can grant them a city next to their old lands which can still be attacked by their enemy).

This one is a big one: Disallowing the abandonment of cities by means other than building them away with a Worker or Settler at size 2 or lower (with 0 food growth). This way teams which are losing wars won't be able to raze their entire country as their opponent advances. That is certainly not historical, and changes the face of war quite a bit from what it was designed to be in SP. A team could appeal to the game admins to try and allow the abandoment of cities in rare circumstances (a city off on a far away island, too corrupt to build down with Settlers in a reasonable amount of time, no boats nearby, etc.).

[Dauphin]

I think you should be allowed to raze any and as many of your own cities as you want.

This way teams which are losing wars won't be able to raze their entire country as their opponent advances. That is certainly not historical, and changes the face of war quite a bit from what it was designed to be in SP

It was quite a common tactic to destroy crops, fortifications and otherwise destroy all things of tactical value before being forced to withdraw. I do not see razing a city as particularly ahistorical.

I would only vote for this suggestion if we are able to raze any self-owned city that is size 6 or smaller.

Sometimes you raze cities simply due to poor city placement, or to pull out of ICS.

[Trip]

Originally posted by Dauphin
It was quite a common tactic to destroy crops, fortifications and otherwise destroy all things of tactical value before being forced to withdraw. I do not see razing a city as particularly ahistorical.
You can pillage tile improvements (crops, forts, mines, roads, etc.) and sell buildings in cities to prevent an enemy from being able to use them. There is a difference between that and wiping out entire cities, sometimes of massive size, which never occurred in history.

I would only vote for this suggestion if we are able to raze any self-owned city that is size 6 or smaller.

Sometimes you raze cities simply due to poor city placement, or to pull out of ICS.
You can build Settlers or Workers to get the size down to 1 or 2, then with 0 food growth and a final Worker/Settler you can abandon a city that way. I have no problems with that.

What I have a problem with is the wonton cleansing of an entire nation. That never happened. And it wasn't designed to be a tactic (AI civs don't do it, because it wasn't suspected to ever be an issue). It's as much an exploit as perpetual WW or teleporting units or anything else like that.

[brian_the_bold]

scorched earth has been a viable tatic used in warfare trip
some citys to note that were of size and reduced to nothing are berlin naking babylon the list goes on and is a litany of mans inhumanity to man that entire citys were razed or civilizations wore forced to abandon centers of culture...of the citys of history that the great wonders of the world were built how many are still standing?

I am not advocating using this tatic but it is a viable means of wageing war in the face of a superior force until you can regroup

The point is to regroup though and make a stand not telaport your army and eveything else to the other side of the world...

[Trip]

Yes, I am sure there are various few instances of it occurring.

However, can you name me a time an entire civilization destroyed itself entirely?

Look at the PTW ISDG. Grenouille. Firaxis. GCA. Three quarters of all defeated nations have employed this tactic.

Again, scorched earth can be implimented through pillaged tiles and sold buildings. Russia did that during its impressive withdraw in 1812... however, they did not burn down entire cities as they withdrew. Not a single one.

And this tactic is never used in DGs as a chance to "regroup." It's used as "gee, I realize I can never win and I'm bitter, so I'm going to screw my victorious attacker over by destroying everything in his path."

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Laser
There is one addition I would like to make though. No gifting of cities to teleport units: period. You can gift a city, if that is a permanent gifting......see our ISDG for details. :rolleyes:

See section 3.5, the wording may not be the clearest but it is listed as an exploit.

Originally posted by Trip
A ban on gifting cities to another civ who doesn't have any adjacent cities (so you can't save a team by gifting them a city on the opposite side of the world, but you can grant them a city next to their old lands which can still be attacked by their enemy).

See section 3.6

Originally posted by Trip
This one is a big one: Disallowing the abandonment of cities by means other than building them away with a Worker or Settler at size 2 or lower (with 0 food growth). This way teams which are losing wars won't be able to raze their entire country as their opponent advances. That is certainly not historical, and changes the face of war quite a bit from what it was designed to be in SP. A team could appeal to the game admins to try and allow the abandoment of cities in rare circumstances (a city off on a far away island, too corrupt to build down with Settlers in a reasonable amount of time, no boats nearby, etc.).

There seems to be some dissent here, I will leave the discussion open on this for a while longer before adding, revising or leaving this issue alone.

Originally posted by Trip
However, can you name me a time an entire civilization destroyed itself entirely?

Only in fiction, and in very obscure works at that. :)

[miccofl]

Am I the only one that finds the following point pointless to anyone other than GCA and GWT?

4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game!

[Furloaf]

Originally posted by miccofl
4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game! [/B]

:rant: :po: :kill: :q: This defies logic. Why make a list of exploits and rules and include this in it?

Originally posted by miccofl
Am I the only one that finds the following point pointless to anyone other than GCA and GWT? .

:b:

[Trip]

Originally posted by miccofl
See section 3.6

...

3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war

A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that civ. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.
I fail to see how 3.6 is related to gifting cities to keep another civ alive... :hmmm:

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Trip
I fail to see how 3.6 is related to gifting cities to keep another civ alive... :hmmm:

Sorry, my mistake. I should know better than to try and work on something so complicated with a limited timeframe.

It is covered partially by the revised:
3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness by evasion

Remaining at war with a team after being defeated (driven from home) by jumping across to the opposite side of the continent/planet or having a Settler on a Galley for the sole purpose of driving up that team's war weariness (preventing the use of governments which suffer from war weariness).but it does not cover the whole point. Care to take a stab at a revision to include your points?

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by miccofl
Am I the only one that finds the following point pointless to anyone other than GCA and GWT?

4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game!

Pointless? Maybe
Nonsensical? Definitely

What are they trying to say? If there isn't a rule against a generally unknown cheat then it is perfectly legal and that no discussion of legality can be made when it becomes public?

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Dauphin
Pointless? Maybe
Nonsensical? Definitely

What are they trying to say? If there isn't a rule against a generally unknown cheat then it is perfectly legal and that no discussion of legality can be made when it becomes public?

I am really tempted to add a category (5) What is this? rather than post this to (2) Non-exploits section with a comment of:

"We can see everyone on the map, we have contact with the civs that almost ran a certain civ out of existance and we have a refugee from a civ that the fleeing civ almost eliminated. We can speak, how about you?"But I think the resulting shitstorm from that... well, if anyone has been following the threads at CDG you will know what I mean.

Anyone have a tactful solution?

[Laser]

Originally posted by miccofl
Anyone have a tactful solution?Sometimes, it's best to be all up in their face. I say be all up in their face. ;)

If the thing about teleporting units is vague....why? How about we spell it out with a 3.8 or whatever needs to be added (sorry haven't read it).

Edit: okay...it's not too vague. I just don't want to put up with that crap again.

And as for Trip's issue, I think razing your own cities is a perfectly fine strategy. Though it can piss you off, you can't say the Russians didn't piss off Napoleon when they left Moscow empty and burning.

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Laser
Sometimes, it's best to be all up in their face. I say be all up in their face. ;)

I’m with you there, but it would be a severe breach of protocol (not that it wouldn’t be fun.)

Originally posted by Laser
If the thing about teleporting units is vague....why? How about we spell it out with a 3.8 or whatever needs to be added (sorry haven't read it).

It is covered here as well (just not all that well):
3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

Originally posted by Laser
Edit: okay...it's not too vague. I just don't want to put up with that crap again.

And as for Trip's issue, I think razing your own cities is a perfectly fine strategy. Though it can piss you off, you can't say the Russians didn't piss off Napoleon when they left Moscow empty and burning.

Moscow survived to be sought after by Hitler, he didn’t get it either. I’m finding myself more and more in agreement with the “Quitter” clause.

[Trip]

Originally posted by Laser
And as for Trip's issue, I think razing your own cities is a perfectly fine strategy. Though it can piss you off, you can't say the Russians didn't piss off Napoleon when they left Moscow empty and burning.
The damn city wasn't erased from the map like they can be in these games. The Russians expected to get Moscow back. They did what they did to starve Napoleon's army, not because they were about to be conquered.

Again. Civilizations don't simply destroy themselves when they think they might be conquered. Burning land/pillaging improvements? Yes. Dismantling factories, mills, city infrastructure/selling city improvements? Yes again. Burning a good majority of a continent's population to the ground? No.

[Laser]

Actually, Stalin did kill a lot of his own people. :cute:

[Trip]

Originally posted by miccofl
It is covered partially by the revised:
but it does not cover the whole point. Care to take a stab at a revision to include your points? While the two points are related, I don't think they belong together (remaining at war to cause WW and jumping across the planet to survive).

So here's my attempt at a new point (liable to revision, of course):

3.8 Preserving defeated teams

Teams are prohibited from giving one or more cities to another team for the purpose of that team's survival in the face of possible extermination by third team. This does not disallow a team's ability to try to save itself by its own independent means, such as using ships to settle elsewhere (barring situations prohibited in 3.7).

[Trip]

Originally posted by Laser
Actually, Stalin did kill a lot of his own people. :cute: Because he was a bastard, not because the USSR was about to be wiped from existence. :p

[Trip]

Oh, and another thing I thought of that could be seen as an exploit:

If a team is on a relatively small continent/island it may be possible to cover every single tile that touches water to prevent enemy landings from taking place. It used to be that you could even use bombardment units and Settlers/Workers to block tiles from landing (I don't know if this was changed in Conquests of not).

Needless to say, blocking an entire continent from naval invasion is very ahistorical and is a very borderline exploit.

What do you guys think?

[miccofl]

Originally posted by Trip
Oh, and another thing I thought of that could be seen as an exploit:

If a team is on a relatively small continent/island it may be possible to cover every single tile that touches water to prevent enemy landings from taking place. It used to be that you could even use bombardment units and Settlers/Workers to block tiles from landing (I don't know if this was changed in Conquests of not).

Needless to say, blocking an entire continent from naval invasion is very ahistorical and is a very borderline exploit.

What do you guys think?

If I were playing Scandinavia I would not be concerned, Berserks now have amphibous landing capability. Since it wasn't one of our choices it gives a little cause for concern. Seems it will take bombers to invade before Amphibious Warfare. (I would think that workers settlers and bombardment units would still be available as a blocking force.)

While it might be a borderline exploit I don't see it happening, it would take too many units and since we will be on a standard map with continents the possibilities are even more remote.


I will update the main post this evening. Please try and post the rest of the changes by tonight as I will have limited time Sunday before the deadline.

[Laser]

The fact that you can block landings like that is a flaw in the game's design. Units with no defense value, such as workers and artillery, should be able to be immediately engaged by non-amphibious units unloading from ships. Empty cities should be invadable by non-amphibious units directly from the ship (you could do that in Civ1 and 2). Furthermore, non-amphibious units should be able to make amphibious attacks with a 50% or so penalty to their attack strength, while amphibious units should get a 50% or so bonus when attacking from ship to land.

[miccofl]

I know I said I would update the list but that is soon to be 3 pages back and not everyone has read everything so let redundancy rule ;)

All changes to our list need to be submitted and received by 10:00 PM GMT Sunday (5:00 PM EST)
Items in red are disputed, see section 2.
Items in green are to be amended, see section 3.

These are the agreed exploits:
(1) Agreed exploits (except where denoted by color)

0. General Rules

0.1. Team members

All teams must list their members publicly without exception.

0.2.a Out of game Espionage

Any espionage in form of trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent’s team, hacking screenshot or save-game upload locations, etc. is strictly forbidden. Any team involved in such activities should face severe consequences up to exclusion from the ISDG.

0.2.b Team membership

A person may only be member of one team. A double membership is considered espionage and the offending person will be banned from the ISDG.

0.3.a Team members switching teams

A team member may only switch to another team with the consent of both teams involved and also those teams that were in contact with the team he/she leaves.
Switching to a team in the other group should be allowed.

0.3.b Members of defeated teams

Similar rules as mentioned in a) might be applicable here.
But as we have a qualification round and then successive finals, we might also want to disallow members of a defeated team to join another team as "refugees".
A team should stay more or less as it is for both games.


1. Diplomacy and Alliance tricks

1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers

Two (or more) teams can get double (triple...) use of bombardment units and Workers by using the units on their respective turns, then letting their "enemy" capture and use them in turn. When facing an alliance of two civs with 20 Catapults among them, it's quite disconcerting to have to face 40 rounds of bombardment.
Alliances and peace treaties will be respected through in-game diplomacy.

1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource

Two teams can get the use of a single resource by repeated gifting and then canceling of the trade. One Iron should only supply one civ at a time.
Repeated cancellation of trade is okay for supplying bursts of a resource for a civ upgrade, as long as it is not also being used for making a dual supply out of one resource.

1.3.a) Generating Leaders by sacrificing cheap units

A team can build a bunch of Warriors and let another team slaughter them with Elites, in hopes of generating a Great Leader. This is actually quite costly, but the results can be dramatic (fast Forbidden Palace or Palace) if the teams get lucky.

1.3.b) Generating Workers by sacrificing cheap units to Mayans

Similar to leaders, you can sacrifice units against a Mayan civ to generate more workers early one.

1.3.c) Provoking a GA by sacrificing cheap units to UU's

Don't provoke the GA for a friendly civ by "offering" a unit to kill.

1.4 Declaring war for happiness

Two teams can declare war on each other for purposes of generating a little Happiness, which can lead to increased production through WLTKD.

1.5. Contact to another civ before actual contact

Teams should not contact other teams for any in-game purpose until they have contact in the game.

1.6.a) Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation

In Conquests, map trading is pushed back to Navigation. If two teams can exchange maps out-of-game, the Seafaring trait becomes a lot less attractive.

1.6.b) Exchange of contact

Since you cannot really exchange contact, you can resort to simply telling that you live next to XX. A possible rule is to disallow a team to tell others about its neighbors before Printing Press.

1.7 Teams "joining" each other

A team likely to be defeated soon can gift all he has to another team. This can result in a dramatic shift of power and is especially powerful in the qualification game.
Another possibility is for one team gifting all but one city to another one to allow them to wipe out another team or two, so that both advance to the next round.
Therefore, gifting cities (and maybe techs and gold as well) is to be limited to a max of 3 cities per 20 turns and 1 city every 5 turns.

2. Metagame tricks

2.1 Reloading to alter unwanted random results

It is possible to alter the results of combat (even with preserve random seed turned on) by reloading the save and playing out the turn slightly differently (i.e. by attacking in a different order, or basically by playing around with things that trigger the RNG). This can result in finding highly one-sided battles, and the appearance of an inordinate number of Elites and Great Leaders.
This is considered cheating!

2.2 Manipulating a savegame file

Crafty players use the PBEM savegames to obtain information, or worse.
Again, let's play Civ3. If we allow tools like MapStat, then the door is wide open for any other file-manipulation program, which is a can of worms.

2.3 Loading a save while zoomed out

A team's turn-player can configure his or her game to be zoomed out, then load a PBEM savegame, which can reveal certain facts about the previous team's location.
Solution: all teams must agree to zoom in before loading the savegame and/or zoom in before saving the game.

2.4 Renaming units/cities to confuse/mislead opponents

Cities can be renamed to names of techs ('Monotheism') or sums of Gold ('210 Gold') or anything else that can be traded in the diplomacy screen. This allows a team to screw over another in a very weird way.
Worker and Settler names can be interchanged to hide their identities in stacks (since their stats are the same). Units with identical stats can be renamed for the same effect (Enkidu Warriors and Spearmen, Ancient Cavalry and Gallic Swordsmen).
Units/cities, therefore, may not be renamed for the specific purpose of fooling opponents.


3. Game Mechanics tricks

3.1.a) Fortify All

Anything relating to "Fortify all." This includes last player-fortifies stuff, as well as Fortifying a boat in waters at the end of a turn to increase its visibility in the coming turn at start. Just don't use the bloody command!

3.1.b) Fortify a boat passenger

Same as Fortify All a boat you can just fortify a unit in the boat for increased visibility next turn.

3.2.a) Hitting F1/back-forward to change production

It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and change production before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue. This can result in tech-enabled units and Wonders being completed the very turn the tech is researched, or production to be changed in response to an enemy's actions (like Walls if a stack moves toward a specific city and not another).

3.2.b) Hitting F1/back-forward for double tile usage

Furthermore, usage of F1 or back - forward buttons in the city view during the pre-turn production queue can be used to use the same tile by 2 or more different cities in the same turn.

3.3 Using Go To/Auto-Explore/Auto-Workers to get extra movement

The last civ in the turn order can issue a GoTo command to a unit, and have that unit move twice before the next turn begins. This is very strong in wartime.
Every civ has that option, that's why i wanted that no one use go-to.
And it's not that you got extra move-points with that, you only use the move-points for the next turn early -> mean 2 turns in 1 and 1 you can not move the unit.
Similar results can be achieved with auto-explore and auto-workers.

3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war

A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that civ. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.

3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness but not actual fighting

This is considered exploitative by some, but the game mechanics gradually decrease WW unless actual fighting or units in enemy borders is happening.
However, being kept in the game by a friendly civ with a single city for the SOLE purpose of inflicting WW to an opponent is questionable.

4. Miscellaneous

4.1 Punishment for breaking the rules

A: Exclusion of the team and all members from the game
For repetitive (proven!) cheating. For out of game spying. For repetitive breaking of several "minor" rules and ignoring the warnings of the admins.
B: Forfeiting a turn (admins skip the turn)
For exceeding the time limit. For repeated breaking of a minor rule (e.g. F1 double tile usage). For proven cheating. For ignoring multiple warnings from the admins.
C: Official warning from the game admins
For breaking a minor rule once or twice. For inappropriate use of language in the UN, in team negotiations (excluding RPG-type talk of course , etc.

4.2 Reputation and honor system

The admins should keep track of all official treaties and should set up a reputation system with no specifics but a simple level of "trustworthiness".

4.3.a) Unknown exploits

The teams agree to abide by the rulings of the admin council should a new, previously unknown (to everyone) exploit/bug appear in the game.

4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game!

4.4 Fairness Pledge

Every team must agree to a fairness pledge before the game starts.


Intersite 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 login 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 my home 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. The 24 hour rule notwithstanding, we acknowledge that a time counter will be used to time play, and all reasonable efforts will be made to play the turn within the constraints of the time counter, which provides 4 hours per turn per team, in aggregate fashion. Each team will start with a 'bank' of 100 hours.

In the case of game process issues and previously unknown exploits/bugs, we agree to acknowledge and abide by the ruling of the neutral administrator council. The neutral administrator council for this game will be Elucidus, Strider and Bootstoots from CDG, who will not be, and will not have been, a member of a team in the game.

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


We wish you all the best of luck and good civin'!

The non-exploits and disputed items: (items in the main list that we feel do not belong there from this thread and other discussions.)
(2) Non-exploits
3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

This is not an exploit as it requires much time and thought as well as many naval units and therefore a significant resource expenditure to enable. If a team wishes to go through all the time and trouble required to set this up, let them do it.

4.3.b) Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. All known or partly known issues have to be decided before the game starts. Ignorance of a game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game!

We can see every civ on our map, we have contact with all civs but one but due to efficient map trading and diplomacy we have extensive knowledge of their existence. We can speak, how about the rest of you?

The Amendments (changes to items on the list that we fell need to be made)
(3) Amendments to existing items
Section 0 should be revised as follows:


0.0 Regulating the out-of-game conduct

0.1 Membership regulations

0.1.a Membership Roster

All teams should maintain a public listing of their membership. The list should include at a minimum the name and city of the members. (This will stop many “witch-hunts” before they start and if necessary, simplifies the IP trace for the forum administrators.)

0.1.b Allowed Memberships

Each forum should be allowed to determine the requirements for membership of its team on its own. However, a person may only be member of one team. A double membership is considered espionage and the offending person will be banned from the ISDG. Any team that encourages or allows double membership activities should face severe sanction and/or consequences.

0.2 Switching Teams

0.2.a General

Switching teams between the two games should be allowed provided that the person is on only one team at a time. Switching between two active teams in the same game should be expressly forbidden.

0.2.b Membership Retention after Defeat

Team members chose their team before the game begins. They are subject to the pledge made by all teams to remain in the competition until the last game is played or their team has been removed from the competition due to early elimination in the first set of games. Once a team has been eliminated from any further competition in the series, then and only then may its members be considered refugees.

0.2.c Refugees

Once the requirements for refugee status have been fulfilled, refugees may join another team provided that their team had in-game contact with the team they wish to join or the team they wish to join has/had in-game contact with at least two teams that had in-game contact with the defeated team.

0.3 Out-of-Game Espionage

0.3.a Intentional Espionage

Any espionage in form of trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent’s team, hacking screenshot or savegame upload locations, etc. is strictly forbidden.

0.3.b Inadvertent or Accidental Espionage

All teams and their members are allowed to visit/view any other team’s public areas. An accidental viewing of a private area due to a security hole or other bug in the forum’s software should not be considered a deliberate act provided the following conditions are met:
1. The member must have exited the private area immediately upon such discovery (it is up to each forum to clearly label its private areas.)
2. The member must privately inform his team leader of the incident, the team leader must put the member in contact with one of the Game Administrators and the member must give to the Game Administrator the particulars of the incident (how it happened, how much was seen, etc.)
The Game Administrator should then inform the violated team of its security hole and by which team, then determine what action if any should be taken against the member. Action to be taken should not exceed a 50 turn exclusion of the member from the game.



Section 1.6 should be revised as follows:
1.6.a Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation

No maps of any kind may be traded before the requisite technology of Navigation has been researched. This is inclusive of photographs, drawn maps, minimaps or embassy screenshots. A verbal description is acceptable.

Section 1.6.b should be revised as follows:
1.6.b Exchange of contact
No team may trade or broker contact between other teams until the requisite tech of Printing Press has been researched. A simple statement to team Z that we live next to team X is allowable so long as no transactions are made or brokered between the two, treated as a rumor.

Section 3.7 should be revised as follows:
3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness by evasion

Remaining at war with a team after being defeated (driven from home) by jumping across to the opposite side of the continent/planet or having a Settler on a Galley for the sole purpose of driving up that team's war weariness (preventing the use of governments which suffer from war weariness).

Our additions: (from this thread and other discussions, If I missed your suggestion don't take offense, just post it again please. We have until Sunday to finalize our list.)
(4) Additions

3.8 Preserving defeated teams

Teams are prohibited from giving one or more cities to another team for the purpose of that team's survival in the face of possible extermination by third team. This does not disallow a team's ability to try to save itself by its own independent means, such as using ships to settle elsewhere (barring situations prohibited in 3.7).

4.2.a Battle Log – Issues created by luck or the RNG

For all combats, teams must submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. This will help reduce claims of cheating and will also be more realistic.

Why would you not be able to see who attacked you just because it's PBEM? The only reason this isn't implemented is because it would be too much work to program a replay into PBEM games. -Trip

alternative I agree with Trip in principle but I think my alternative resolves the issues as well and will stand a better chance of passage -miccofl
4.2.a Battle Log – Issues created by luck or the RNG

For any turn in which there is a combat, the team initiating that combat must submit or otherwise provide to the Game Administrators, a log of all unit movements and battles for that turn and the order that they were played.

[Trip]

Originally posted by miccofl
While it might be a borderline exploit I don't see it happening, it would take too many units and since we will be on a standard map with continents the possibilities are even more remote.Ahhh, but there you are wrong.

In the current Apolyton PTW DG a team has managed to conquer its continent (a smallish-sized continent but 2 civs still started on it) and is now warding off invasion with everything from Catapults to Workers and Settlers. Every single tile is covered and the continent cannot be invaded until Marines.

That was the reason I brought this up in the first place... I saw it first hand.

[Trip]

Originally posted by Laser
The fact that you can block landings like that is a flaw in the game's design. Units with no defense value, such as workers and artillery, should be able to be immediately engaged by non-amphibious units unloading from ships. Empty cities should be invadable by non-amphibious units directly from the ship (you could do that in Civ1 and 2). Furthermore, non-amphibious units should be able to make amphibious attacks with a 50% or so penalty to their attack strength, while amphibious units should get a 50% or so bonus when attacking from ship to land. So do you think this is an exploit we should ban?

[miccofl]

Intereting, only 5 teams voted (by posting their approvals and additions) before the deadline so this issue is going to be the game breaker.

GCA, as expected, voted to keep using their exploits and seemed to take offence when the other teams that voted shot down the "Lucky Exemption."

Several teams voted against the punishment clauses, GWT voted to remove 3.7 entirely and Apolyton came up with a 3.8 similar to the one we proposed
3.8 City Gifting, Limit this to something like: Perhaps gifting of cities should be limited to cities that the giftee can reach. ie the giftee must have a unit next to or within a certain distance of the city before it can be handed over. This will stop intercontinental gifting of cities to save a dieing team. (note the entire issue of city gifting probably needs a lot more discussion and is related to 1.7)

Many of the known exploits were voted useable by several of the teams but there is no clear majority for any of them. It seems that very few teams wish to play this game honorably. Do not expect this game to start anytime soon. :\

[Laser]

I think the small continent exploit should be banned...yes.

[miccofl]

The UN thread for this reads like a nightmare cluster**** from hell. These issues will prevent this game from starting anytime soon.

On one side we have those who would use every exploit to their advantage (like they are doing in the present game.) On another side you have those who think like we do. Somewhere in the middle is everyone else but they have issues with some of the non-issues or they wish to remove the penalties that could enforce the rules that finally get established, making the whole process meaningless.

Perhaps we need to establish the Ministry of Postal Services so we have someone to go and clean house... :evilgrin:

[miccofl]

originally posted by Elucidus (the Game Administrator) at the UN
I would recommend that you start off to see if the document as a whole is acceptable and agreeable. If not bring issues to the forefront and we may work a compromise of some sort. But the issues have been discussed and we can't make everyone happy.

BTW, he is my latest rendition.

By playing or participating in the Intersite Demogame (IDG) as an individual or as a member of a team, you and your team agree to abide by all rules herein without exception and as understood by the Game Staff. Violation of this agreement is subject to expulsion from said game, games, tourneys, etc. without prior warning.


Regulating Out-of-Game Conduct

0.0 - Game Staff Authority

0.0.1 - Definitions

Intent: Many of the below rulings are based on the intent of a team or individual. Intent is determined by the Game Staff and is only decided after investigation.


0.1 - Team Memberships [b]
0.1.1 - Membership Roster

[b]Description: All teams are required to maintain a public listing of their membership. This list will include the name and city of the members, at a minimum.

Purpose: To help everyone know who is on what team and help discourage and prevent out-of-game espionage.

Verdict: Not posting or keeping the teams public listing up to date within 15 calander days is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once - Yellow, (verbal warning), Repeat – Yellow (written warning and apology)



0.1.2 - Allowed Memberships

Description: Each forum will be allowed to determine the requirements for membership of its team as it sees fit. However, a person may only be a member of one team at any given time. A double membership is automatically considered out-of-game espionage.

Purpose: To disallow the use of out-of-game espionage and prevent anything that resembles out-of-game espionage.

Verdict: Double membership is strictly prohibited and doing so is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Red (Ejection – Personal or Team)



0.2 Switching Teams

0.2.1 - Switching Teams

Description: No team member is allowed to switch teams, until after their team is knocked out of the game, and this is with special restrictions as stated below.

Definition: Switching teams between the two games is allowed, provided that the person is on only one team at a time. Your team being knocked out of the current game makes you refugees, for the remainder of this game only.

Purpose: To minimize the opportunity and possibility of out-of-game espionage.

Verdict: Switching teams is a personal and team violation for both the individual who switched teams and the team who allowed him to switch. If a team reports that they did not know about the team switch, because of a different name or otherwise, it will be considered a personal offense.

Punishment Level: Red (Ejection – Personal and/or Team)


0.2.2 - Membership retention after Defeat

Description: Members of teams that were defeated in the current game are allowed to TEMPORARILY join the team that conquered them, if the team will have them. They may also join neighboring teams that they had contact with at the time of their defeat.

Definition: Neighboring does not mean specifically teams adjacent to them in game, more specifically it means teams they would have had the capability to travel to with their current technology. Temporarily changing teams means that when the current game is over the teams default back to where they were. If someone would like to switch teams at that point they may do so upon approval of the gaining team

Verdict: See 0.2.1 Switching teams for the verdict and punishment levels.


0.2.3 Refugees

Description: Upon becoming a refugee according to rule 0.2.1, refugees may join another team provided that their team had in-game contact with the team they wish to join or the team they wish to join has/had in-game contact with at least two teams that had in-game contact with the eliminated team. This is a temporary effect as described in rule 0.2.2. See that rule for more information.


0.3 - Out-of-Game Espionage

0.3.2 - Inadvertent or Accidental Espionage

Description/Procedures: All teams and their members are allowed to visit/view any other team's public access areas. An accidental viewing of a private or secure area due to a security hole or other bug/glitch in any software should not be considered a deliberate act of espionage provided the following conditions are met:
A) The members must have exited the private area immediately upon such discovery (it is up to each forum to clearly label its private areas.)
B) The member must privately inform his team leader of the inccident, the team leader must put the member in contact with one of the game staff and the member must give the game staff details about the incident (how it happened, how much was seen, etc.) The game staff will then inform the violated team of its security problem and which team violated their security and then determine what action if any should be taken against the member. Action to be taken should not exceed a 50-turn exclusion of the member from the game.



0.3.3 - Intentional Espionage

Description: Any out-of-game espionage in any form is strictly prohibited.

Definition: Trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent's team, hacking screenshots or savegame upload location, or any other action considered espionage as determined by the game staff

Verdict: doing any of the above as determined by the game staff is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Red (Ejection)


0.4 Punishment

There are three possible punishment levels for breaking the rules. These are Yellow, Orange, and Red Offenses. All punishments for rule breaking will be determined by the game staff. The punishments listed with each rule/section are general guidelines, they are by no means a limit or restriction to the minimum/maximum punishment for a given offense.

The minimum punishment for an orange offense is forfeiture of one turn of play, which will be skipped by the game staff. Where rules explicitly state otherwise and for repeat offences the game staff will determine what a team will forfeit.

A team that commits a Red Offence will forfeit an enormous amount of turns, in upwards of 30 or 40 turns, they may even be ejected from the current game. A repeat offense is easily enough for they to be expelled from the entire IDG or ever playing on CDG again.

Team Punishments include:
Forfeiture of turns*
Forfeiture of tradable assets (Cities, money, etc.)
Forfeiture of untradable assets (units, population, etc.)
Ejection from the current game
Suspension From the rest of the IDG (to include the championship game)
Expulsion from ever playing on or with CDG again

*Note- When a turn is skipped, all production, science, taxes, building, and other things are reduced to the minimum possible producing levels. This may cause mass unhappiness or reduction in funds.

Personal Punishments include:
Suspension for # of turns as prescribed by the game staff
Ejection from the rest of the current game
Suspension from the rest of the IDG (to include the championship game)
Expulsion from ever playing on or with CDG again



In-Game Glitches/Bugs/Exploits

1.1 - Double-Duty Exploit

Description: No team or individual is permitted to 'allow' the capture of their bombardment or workers with the intent of executing a double-duty exploit.

Definition: Two or more teams capturing and recapturing non-combat units (Including bombardment units) with the intent to use them against a third party team simultaneously.

Purpose: To prevent two or more teams from sharing units and their abilities in the same turn for multiple turns.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows Double-Duty through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Red (5-20 Turns)


1.2 - Resource Sharing Exploit

Description: No team or individual is permitted to share a single resource through the use of the Resource Sharing Exploit.

Definition: Two teams gifting and regifting a resource as well as cancelling it allow two teams to get use of the same resource that wouldn't be otherwise possible.

Purpose: A resource is to be used by one team per turn, no exceptions.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows Resource Sharing through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: First Offense/Turn (warning) - Yellow, Repeat Offense (2 or more turns) - Orange (2 + turns)


1.3 Leader Sacrifices

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise allow another team to kill-off any of its units with the intent of creating a leader for either team.

Definition: A team creating weak units or sending its out-of-date units after another team with the intent of helping that team create a leader.

Purpose: To prevent great leaders from appearing between two allied teams abusing the game system

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows Leader Sacrifices through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once (1 Unit) – Orange (1 Turn), Repeat Offense - Red (2-10 Turns)


1.4 Worker Sacrifices

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise allow another team to kill-off any of its units using those units with the capture ability with the intent of creating a worker for either team.

Definition: A team creating weak units or sending its out-of-date units after another team with the intent of helping that team create workers.

Purpose: To prevent workers from appearing between two allied teams abusing the game system.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows Worker Sacrifices through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once (1 Unit) – Orange (1 Turn), Repeat Offense - Red (2-10 Turns)


1.5 War Happiness

Description: No team or individual is permitted to declare war on anyone with the intent of generating some happiness amongst its populace.

Definition: A team declaring war on another just to invoke a little extra happiness.

Purpose: To prevent this 'feature' from being exploited and retain the spirit of the game.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows Happiness to be generated in such a way as to violate the purpose of this rule through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once – Orange (1+ Turns), Repeat Offense – Red (1-20 Turns)


1.6 Invalid Map Trading

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise trade any sort of map, whether it be a screen shot, minimap, hand drawing, or any other 'picture' of the in-game map, mini-map, or embassy screenshot before the requisite tech is discovered. Verbal/text descriptions are allowed, but coordinates are not.

Definition: A team creating screen shots, drawings, or other depictions of any part of the in-game map before the requisite tech has been discovered.

Purpose: To prevent the use of outside game elements to break the spirit of the game by allowing maps to be traded before they are allowed in-game.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows any map trading before the tech is discovered through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once – Orange (1-5 Turns), Repeat Offense - Red (2-20 Turns)




1.7 - Exchange of Contact

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise trade any sort of contact information until the requisite tech is discovered. A simple statement to team 'Z' that you live next to team 'Y' is allowable so long as no transactions are made or brokered between the two.

Definition: A team trading anything for any location or contact information before allowed in-game.

Purpose: To prevent the use of outside game elements to break the spirit of the game by allowing contact and location information to be traded before they are allowed in-game.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows any contact or location information trading before the tech is discovered through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once – Orange (1-5 Turns), Repeat Offense - Red (2-20 Turns)


1.8 - Enjoining Teams

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise trade multiple cities with the intent of joining teams to destroy another team and keep both teams alive to survive to the end. If a team decides to drop out however, they are allowed to change

Definition: A team trading multiple cities in a short period of time, in order to allow one team anything for any location or contact information before allowed in-game.

Purpose: To prevent the use of outside game elements to break the spirit of the game by allowing contact and location information to be traded before they are allowed in-game.

Verdict: Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows any contact or location information trading before the tech is discovered through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Once – Orange (1-5 Turns and/or Cities), Repeat Offense - Red (5+ turns, Double cities given, and possible ejection, suspension, or expulsion).



Metagame Tricks

2.1 - Reloading...

Description: No team or indivdual is allowed to reload the game with the intent of altering the outcome of any event, combat, or other in-game result.

Definition: Someone reloading the game when something happens that they don't like and wish to change. Playing the turn in a different order to alter the outcome of said happenings.

Purpose: To prevent a team from replaying a turn until the most optimum outcome is achieved or otherwise increasing their odds of winning.

Verdict: Reloading the game or using any exploit or bug that allows altering the RNG outcome or replaying a turn through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Red (1-10 Turns)


2.2 - Save Manipulation

Description: No team or individual is permitted to use the PBEM savegames or other files to obtain information or alter any in-game element. This includes monitoring or altering memory while the game is loaded. Using MapStat is also prohibbited.

Definition:An individual scanning or monitoring loaded files into memory or altering a file can obtain location information and more, they can even alter in game data.

Purpose:To prevent the use of outside game elements to break the spirit of the game by allowing someone to outright cheat.

Verdict:Using these or any other methods that allows altering the in-game content through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once - Automatic Expulsion


2.3 - Zoomed Loading

Description: No team or individual is permitted to have their settings set to have the game zoomed out when loading a PBEM savegame.

Definition:Loading the game when zoomed out can reveal information that you would not otherwise have access to.

Purpose:To prevent the gathering of information against the spirit of the game.

Verdict:Using this exploit or any other exploit that allows learning any information about another team that you would not be able to get through the in-game espionage system is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once - Red (1-10 Turns)


2.4 - Misleading through Renaming

Description: No team or individual is permitted to rename a unit or city with the intent of misleading or confusing opponents.

Definition:Cities can be renamed to names of tech or sums of gold or anything else in an effort to not trade what that opponent agreed to. Units can be renamed to other units and appear to be something else entirely.

Purpose:To prevent the misleading or confusion of another team through malicious use of in-game features.

Verdict:Using this 'feature' or any other feature or exploit that allows misleading or confusing another team is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once – Red (5-Expulsion and forfeiture of double what was not legally traded)


3. Game Mechanics tricks

3.1.1 - Fortify All

Description: No team or individual is allowed to use the “Fortify All” command on a stack of units that contain any units that have used up their movement points.

Definition:A team may get the effect of a unit being fortified prior to an attack when that unit should have not have been able to fortify itself because it had no movement points to do so. This is done by using the stack command “Fortify All.”

Purpose:To prevent the unfair use of combat tactics.

Verdict:Using this command on a stack of units that has one or more units that do not have any movement points left is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once - Red (1-5 Turns)


3.1.2 - Fortifying a boat/passenger

Description: Similar to 3.1.1, except now addressing sea vessels. The sea vessel also would enjoy increased visibility during the next turn. A team can move the vessels the full allotment of movement points then “wake” the passengers and give them then “Fortify all” command which fortifies the sea vessel as well. It is allowed to use the “Fortify All” command on a vessel or a stack of vessels that has movement points left before the command was issued.

Definition:A team may get the effect of a sea vessel being fortified prior to an attack when that vessel should have not have been able to fortify itself because it had no movement points to do so.

Purpose:To prevent the illegal use of having increased visibility.

Verdict:Using this command on a stack of vessels with passengers or a lone vessel with passengers that do not have any movement points left is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once – Red (1-5 Turns)


3.2.1 - Hitting F1/back-forward to change production


Description: It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and change production or rush items before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue.

Definition:This can result in tech-enabled units and Wonders being completed the very turn the tech is researched, or production to be changed in response to an enemy's actions (like Walls if a stack moves toward a specific city and not another).

Purpose:To prevent the unfair allocation of resources not intended to be used in a certain way on the previous turn and keep gameplay flowing within the spirit of the game.

Verdict:Using the pre-turn production queue at the beginning of a turn to change production or to rush builds in a city is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once - Red (2+ Turns)


3.2.2 - Hitting F1/back-forward for double tile usage

Usage of F1 or back - forward buttons in the city view during the pre-turn production queue can be used to use the same tile by 2 or more different cities in the same turn.

Description: It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and work force allocations before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue so that a tile can be used to used by 2 or more different cities in the same turn. .

Definition:This can result in the possibility of a bonus tile being “shared” by 2 or more cities.

Purpose:To prevent the unfair allocation of resources.

Verdict:Using the pre-turn production queue at the beginning of a turn to change production or to rush builds in a city is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once – Red (1-10 Turns)


3.3 Using GoTo/Auto-Explore/Auto-Workers to get extra movement


Description: The last team in the turn order can issue the “GoTo” command, and have a unit move twice before the next turn begins. This is very strong in war-time. Every Civ has that option, that's why it is stipulated that no one use go-to.
And it's not that you got extra movepionts with that, you only use the movepoints for the next turn early -> mean 2 turns in 1 and 1 you can not move the unit.
Similar results can be achieved with auto-explore and auto-workers.

Definition:This can result in the last team to play in a given turn, the ability to move their units twice before another team could move in between

Purpose:To prevent the unfair movement of units; especially during war time.

Verdict:Getting two moves out of a unit or units before you opponent can move through any means is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once - Red (5-10 Turns)


3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

This is to be allowed

3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

Description: A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

Definition:This can result in a Civ’s units being transported out of harms way or to a new war front.

Purpose:To prevent the unfair movement of units; especially during war time.

Verdict:Moving your units in this way or any other way that is against the spirit of the game as determined by the game staff is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once – Red (10-Expulsion)


3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a Civ then immediately declaring war


Description: A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that team. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.


Definition:This can result in a team’s properly acquired War Weariness being shut off and the possibility for the other team to suffer from it should they redeclare war.

Purpose:To prevent unfairly using the games mechanics to negate or reverse the effects of War Weariness,

Verdict:Do not accept peace if your intention is to behave in a war-like manner, unless a determination by the game staff to fall within the rules of this ruleset dictates so. Any method to break war weariness in any such manner is a direct violation of this rule.

Punishment Level:Once – Orange (2-10 Turns), Repeat Offense - Red (5-Expulsion)


3.7 Staying at war to upkeep War Weariness but not actual fighting

Description: Being kept at war by a team with the intent of inflicting War Weariness, and the penalties that are associated with it.

Definition:This can result in a team’s War Weariness being applied and worsened when the team no longer wishes or is able to wage war against the other.

Purpose:To prevent unfairly using the games mechanics to increase, exaggerate, or prolong the effects of War Weariness when waging war is not a reasonable option as determined by the game staff.

Verdict:A team must accept a peace offer, within a reasonable amount of time (determined by the game staff), if war has not been waged or reasonably waged in a reasonable amount of time (all determined by the game staff)

Punishment Level: Once - Orange (1-5 turns and/or Forfeiture or funds), Red (5 – Expulsion)




4.1 Reputation and honor system

4.1.1 - Offical Treaties

All in-game treaties can be submitted to the game staff for an official record. All teams in the treaty must confirm the exact wording with the game staff for the treaty to be officially recorded.


4.1.2 - Distribution of Treaties

All offial treaties will kept private. The only exception to this is where a team in a treaty asks the game staff to send a copy of the treaty to another team.

Example

* Team A and Team B have a treaty, which they submit to the game staff for the official record.
* Team A believes that Team B has broken their treaty, and tell Team C of this.
* Team B believes they did nothing wrong and tells Team C this.
* Team A or Team B can ask the game staff to send a copy of the official treaty to Team C.
* Team C can now make an informed decision on who they believe.



4.2 Unknown exploits

4.2.1 - New Bugs/Exploits

The teams agree to abide by the rulings of the game staff should a new, previously unknown bug/exploit appear in the game.


4.2.2 - Exemption

Issues known by several people/teams in the ISDG are exempt from this rule. Ignorance of a known game feature by one team should not lead to discussion in the middle of the game of whether this is an exploit.

In essence, this says that any existing known issues can not be re-assessed once the game has begun. Only new bugs/exploits will be considered.


4.2.3 Disclosure of new bugs/exploits

Every team has to control its own actions and to look for bugs or game mechanics which could be defined as a bug or exploit. When a team finds such an mechanism (which is not known by other teams), they have to announce this mechanism directly in the public forums at the U.N.

The game staff will be responsible for facilitating a discussion (in either the public or private U.N. forums) and a vote on the issue (by the team captains).

The clock will be stopped whilst this is taking place.



4.3 - Fairness Pledge

Every team must agree to the fairness pledge before the game starts.



4.4 - Battle Log

Description: For all combats, teams must submit a log of what units attacked, retreated, died, won, etc. from each battle on that turn to the team they attacked. Including capturing units and cities.

Verdict:Failure to email a log to the game staff of all combat actions is a violation of this rule.

Punishment Level: Yellow (Warning), Yellow (Apology)


5. Turn Progression

5.1 Time allowed for a turn

Every team has a maximum of 24 real world hours to play its move and to send the save. This does not mean, that every team must use all 24 hours.


5.2 Extensions to time limits

In some cases a team is allowed to take more time for a move:

A) If the request is announced in time, which means before the requesting teams turn limit has expired, and if the game staff deem it reasonable.
OR
B) Technical problems, like a downed forum (verified by the game staff).

The Game Staff will determine how much extra time is appropriate for the situation, if any.

[Laser]

Dang, that's a long list. I feel like I'm at a lawyers office or something. Just put the X where I need to sign, because I'm not going to read all that. :lol: ;)

It is good that we have those rules though, and it's good that we have them laid out before the game starts.

On the other hand, a part of me thinks it might be best to just let everybody use any exploit they want because you know some teams are going to cheat anyways. It's just too bad that it is possible to cheat in some ways and never be caught. :\