Posts: 6,770
Threads: 131
Joined: Mar 2004
It's been proposed before, and always ultimately shot down since there's just too many ways to leak a player's identity. Simply noticing time zone correlations with a poster's other activity is very likely enough. Correlation with an absence in other games is a dead giveaway, as is any mistake on logging in with the wrong name.
It's a really touchy situation. Any one single slip over many months can ruin the whole setup. And when it does, the premise becomes unfair as some players are operating under blown cover while some get to stay concealed.
I understand the desire - to play pure Civ without the metagame of players' past histories - but really don't see it working out as planned.
Posts: 5,455
Threads: 18
Joined: Jul 2011
This idea would work much better as a PBEM from the perspective of not blowing cover but you obviously wouldn't have as many players.
Posts: 8,786
Threads: 40
Joined: Aug 2012
If you get everyone participating to make themselves a shortcut with a dedicated CivilizationIV.ini file you wouldn't have the risk of logging in under your real name. I have a bunch of shortcuts for all the different versions of RTR we use. For PB18 the target is:
Code: "C:\Program Files (x86)\2K Games\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4 Complete\Beyond the Sword\Civ4BeyondSword.exe" mod="mods\RB Mod 2.0.6.4" ini=C:\civ4ini\CivilizationIVpb18a.ini
And in that .ini you can set the server address and your alias with the last couple of options:
Code: ; DirectIP Host Address
DirectIP = xenu.no-ip.org:2058
; In-game Alias
Alias = Old Harry
Not a sign up though.
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld
Posts: 18,041
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Well, the desire is to have an anonymous experience entirely, right? I suspect your Sullla/Locke/Mike Hendi/Dtays and mackoti/redogs would be more likely to sign up if they could do so in true secret. I'd think that would override even concerns for skill disparity, etc. Maybe people who want to be anon could PM Brick and he can signups: X in here until it fills.
Posts: 8,293
Threads: 83
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
I'd be willing to do that if that's what people would like to do.
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(June 11th, 2015, 08:45)Jowy Wrote: Sullla was Dtay too?
No he isn't, they are two separate people.
Posts: 18,041
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
(June 11th, 2015, 08:45)Jowy Wrote: Sullla was Dtay too? It's the running joke. 
June 11th, 2015, 10:45
(This post was last modified: June 11th, 2015, 10:50 by Lord Parkin.)
Posts: 4,416
Threads: 34
Joined: Dec 2010
(June 10th, 2015, 10:12)T-hawk Wrote: It's been proposed before, and always ultimately shot down since there's just too many ways to leak a player's identity. Simply noticing time zone correlations with a poster's other activity is very likely enough. Correlation with an absence in other games is a dead giveaway, as is any mistake on logging in with the wrong name.
These are valid concerns, but there are also countermeasures that can be taken. Accidental logins under the wrong name could be prevented by using a login method like Old Harry suggests. Absences could be covered invisibly (to the other players at least) providing there are one or two lurkers volunteering as roaming subs. Timezone correlations are a trickier problem but they could be largely covered by a gentleman's agreement similar to "don't look at other people's threads". If we go with a customized turn tracker then perhaps an additional option would be to remove the timestamp data so only the login/logout/finished turn information is visible at a glance.
(June 10th, 2015, 10:12)T-hawk Wrote: It's a really touchy situation. Any one single slip over many months can ruin the whole setup. And when it does, the premise becomes unfair as some players are operating under blown cover while some get to stay concealed.
I understand the desire - to play pure Civ without the metagame of players' past histories - but really don't see it working out as planned.
It may or may not work out as planned. But why is that a reason not to try? In the past we've had games started where folks have predicted that the long-term prospects of a successful conclusion - or any conclusion at all - are not great. Some of these games have turned out better than expected, some have not. Yet people still sign up to play in these games, because regardless of whether they end in a satisfying finale, they're still fun to be a part of while they last. We can still enjoy the time we spend on the journey, regardless of whether we reach a final destination. 
June 11th, 2015, 11:01
(This post was last modified: June 11th, 2015, 11:02 by Lord Parkin.)
Posts: 4,416
Threads: 34
Joined: Dec 2010
(June 11th, 2015, 08:38)Commodore Wrote: Well, the desire is to have an anonymous experience entirely, right? I suspect your Sullla/Locke/Mike Hendi/Dtays and mackoti/redogs would be more likely to sign up if they could do so in true secret. I'd think that would override even concerns for skill disparity, etc. Maybe people who want to be anon could PM Brick and he can signups: X in here until it fills.
The problem with anonymous signups, though, is that it would become obvious fairly quickly who's likely to be participating in the game by noting which lurkers are conspicuously absent. Therefore we may as well have a signup thread where players register their real names, then introduce the pseudonyms once the game is getting ready to start.
When all that anyone knows is that Sullla/mackoti/whoever is playing as one pseudonym in a game filled with 10-20 pseudonyms, it should be pretty easy for them to hide in plain sight.
|
