Exploits?

[Atlas]

We're also starting to get dangerously close to some items going up on to the Exploits list. Among the things I consider to be intrusively gamey:

* "Pre-chopping" forests so that a whole bunch can be "finished off" in rapid fire once a new tech comes in or a new resource online. This is systematic abuse of features added for other reasons, which circumvents the intent with regard to "prebuilding", and is especially hard-hitting with early game military rushes. This category also includes "pre-working" tiles in other ways, in any systematic approach intended to circumvent exposure to pillaging.

* Deliberate avoidance of learning Masonry to boost the power of early game Great Prophets.

* Systematic "binary research".

* "Seed Corn" Civ4 style.

There are a few others I'm keeping my eye on.

Some tactics are what I think of as "zero sum", in that all they do is require players to up the difficulty to no useful end. The idea being that if you have to add X strength to the AI side of the equation to overcome X strength on your side, what have you actually accomplished? Less than nothing, since the higher the difficulty level for the AI, the more stressed becomes the overall game balance. Some types of issues are unavoidable, though, such as micromanaging tiles in Civ3 to avoid overflow waste, or conducting n-fer trades. Sometimes broken elements are rooted so deeply, they can't be avoided without gutting the whole game. Trying to fix those kind of issues leads to a negative sum, costing more than it can benefit. However, I'm always going to target zero sum items that can be clearly defined.

-I am not sure what you mean about not learning Masonry, do mean so that you can lightbulb better techs?

-"Seed Corn"- I am just lost here....

[Ruff_Hi]

Where did the original post come from - I would like to see them 'in context' rather than just mentioned here. Personally, I have used and reported on (Epic 4) the anti-pillage improvements, I sometimes use the pre-chop too. I am not sold on the benefits of binary science from a mathematics point of view - I have seen situations where it actually hurts, but it does give you a bit of time to think about the next tech.

[regoarrarr]

-I am not sure what you mean about not learning Masonry, do mean so that you can lightbulb better techs?

-"Seed Corn"- I am just lost here....

Civil Service is fairly high up on the list of techs a Great Prophet will research, but not as high as Monotheism, Theology and a few others. But if you don't learn Masonry, then a GP will not offer to learn Mono or Theo (since you don't have the pre-requisites), and you can get Civil Service with it.

Seed Corn - what I'm thinking is maybe early war to steal an AI's worker? Not sure...

[Sullla]

Seed corn refers to stealing an AI worker in the extreme early game, sucker-punching the AI in a way it can't see coming. (It originated in Civ3 where the AIs would sell their starting worker for peanuts, which would cripple their development.)

Not ruling one way or the other on the discussion here, just offering an explanation.

[cynyck]

"This category also includes "pre-working" tiles in other ways, in any systematic approach intended to circumvent exposure to pillaging."

Do you include in this the tactic of stopping a worker before its full movement points have been used, working the tile, and continuing the move on the next turn?

[Blake]

Well I guess this is a better place to discuss than T-Hawks report thread. Here's my thoughts on these issues...

We're also starting to get dangerously close to some items going up on to the Exploits list. Among the things I consider to be intrusively gamey:

* "Pre-chopping" forests so that a whole bunch can be "finished off" in rapid fire once a new tech comes in or a new resource online. This is systematic abuse of features added for other reasons, which circumvents the intent with regard to "prebuilding", and is especially hard-hitting with early game military rushes. This category also includes "pre-working" tiles in other ways, in any systematic approach intended to circumvent exposure to pillaging.

Pre-chopping and pre-working are dodgy... I think that cancelling all workers on a tile should result in the loss of 1 turns work (as it sort of is in SMAC), possibly work should further decay if left un-done. Making stop-starting "lossy" would go a long way to eliminating excessive worker micro - but I feel this would be best as a mod solution.
I do abstain from pre-chopping (at least not more than 1 forest at a time) because I do feel it's pretty cheap.

* Deliberate avoidance of learning Masonry to boost the power of early game Great Prophets.

Yer kidding? What'd a Great Prophet ever do to you? Philo isn't the strongest trait (IMHO) and further reducing their early lightbulb options would make them even weaker. Just rename the Great Prophet Lightbulb to "Theology Popper" because that'd be about the only tech left that might be worthwhile.
Masonry sucks anyway it's only really needed for Wonders, Aqueducts and Construction.

* Systematic "binary research".

Binary science rate, I'm divided on...
Firstly I like BSR a lot, and here's why:
1) It allows for flexibility, the commitment to a particular tech is delayed (good for tech trading), you can choose between research or unit upgrades.
2) It combines very well with tech discounts - both denying them to the AI and gaining them from the AI.
3) It puts more information on-screen, you see clearly your gold surplus (or deficit!) per turn, and can thus track the effect of new cities, marketplaces and such, as well as avoiding surprise strikes (you see the gpt creeping down and down...).
4) It's not much micro - it would be no additional micro at all if the slider only had 0% and 100% settings .

And why I DON'T like BSR:
1) In reports it makes it hard for the reader to track your general science rate, especially when the setting is 100% (the +gpt at 0% is quite meaningful).
2) The strength of BSR is partly grounded in Integer Maths quirks.
3) The slider can only be moved 10% at a time.

BSR I view as half legitimate strategy and half trick... I tend to use it all the time when quite far behind in tech or with a very sick economy (can't afford to accidentally hit negative gpt), if I'm ahead in tech though I don't bother since the trading point is moot - unless I want a constant and large gold stockpile for emergency upgrades or rushbuy.
One thing I don't use BSR for is the integer maths benefit, although I recognize that it is there.

So overall my opinion on BSR is that the game so overwhelmingly favors it that the interface should be changed to just have "Science On / Science Off" .

Trying to ban or regulate BSR would be quite a tangly thing, because I think it IS a legitimate strategy with a sick economy or in the modern ages with US for rush buy. Another solution (Mod) would be making extreme min-maxing lossy, such as having a slight inefficiency at 0-20% and 80-100% (I think this would be a positive thing, especially combined with slightly eased upkeeps at the higher difficulties).

* "Seed Corn" Civ4 style.

I recently wrote my thoughts on this on Apolyton...

"Worker poaching (stealing the AI freebie starting worker with your starting warrior) is very powerful and IMHO exploitive, since the AI does not react in a sensible way... it doesn't try to avoid losing the worker and doesn't bother with retribution... it's supposed to be an AI bonus but it's easy and painless to turn it into a human bonus and that kind of defeats the purpose of having AI bonuses....
So anyway, I abstain from worker poaching unless it's part of a real invasion where I have a credible military and AI cities are going to fall."

I avoid Worker Poaching because there is no legitimate reason to ever declare war on the AI when you have no military, except to steal the worker, which you can only get away with because the AI doesn't react in any sensible way, it's also unduly powerful since a worker early on is a lot of hammers to get for free (I don't exaggerate when I say a poached worker will probably provide more benefit than game-long systematic whipping-bug exploiting, simply because of the turn advantage of those ultra-early 60 hammers).
As such I wouldn't at all object to this being added to the exploits list. The wording shouldn't be unduly difficult either - along the lines of "no stealing workers from the AI if you have no credible military."

[Qwack]

I agree with all of those being exploits except this one:

Deliberate avoidance of learning Masonry to boost the power of early game Great Prophets.

What is deliberate avoidance defined as? I think the only thing here is if those early great prophets didnt give civil service because of avoiding masonry, you would have researched it. But for me, this is not the case in many games(masonry not the greatest tech), and in some of those many games, I use those early great people to take stronger tech's like civil service...

I think this may change in warlords however with masonry giving access to great wall. Either way, I wouldnt consider this as an exploit simply because masonry is not a tech you would rush to research ATM anyways.

I also think its better to avoid using words like "Deliberate" in something like an exploits list.

[Iustus]

* Deliberate avoidance of learning Masonry to boost the power of early game Great Prophets.

It seems to me, if Firaxis was going to fix this in a patch. The best way would be to just adjust the amount of beakers you get from using the lightbulb on a great person downward based on the number (and magnitude) of lower beaker cost techs that were skipped because you did not know the prerequisites.

Or, even simpler, just give you enough beakers for the cheepest tech on its list you dont know yet. So, if you didnt know monotheism or masonry, then a GP would only give you the number of beakers that monotheism costs currently, toward civil service, or whatever tech.

You could also put in a bit a math here if you want to nudge it upwards some, based on how overall advanced you are. Perhaps as simple as which age the tech belongs to compared to your most advanced tech, or the count of techs you know from the age that the lightbulb would pop.

Anyway, seems like there is plenty of opportunity to reduce the effectiveness of this, if they wanted to make a game change to do so. (Are Great Prophets the only ones that have this big gap?)

-I

[sooooo]

I would not mind banning the early worker steal or excessive pre-chopping. I used both of these "exploits" in Epic 5 but I didn't know they were dodgy. I now accept that they are. Also the GPT for resources thing.

I would be against banning BSR or avoiding masonry. These are examples of people discovering something "clever", not an exploit. Preventing people finding ways of beating the higher levels is unavoidable. IMO we should not try to ban something whenever someone discovers a new tactic to win at these levels. You may say "But these tactics now become the only way to win at these levels! Think about variety!". But that's because they have only just been discovered. Given time, a number of new strategies will be discovered an there will be plenty more options. Soon we'll be against the "building a library, hiring 2 scientists and founding Taoism" tactic. Then we'll be limiting the number of suicide catapults. I just think that things like these are a slippery slope, and are only percieved as a problem because alternate strategies are yet to be discovered.

[mihau]

I think that cancelling all workers on a tile should result in the loss of 1 turns work (as it sort of is in SMAC),

veto!
I love CivIV for the simple turn-work_done assignment. I can cancel all worker assignments at the beginning of the turn and reassign them at the end considering the situation (especially after destroying enemy HA 1 tile from my worker teams).
Decaying - OK
Stiff 1 turn loss - VETO!

In epic 5 I have used prechops extensively mostly because my workers had nothing better to do - is this also an exploit?

Or, even simpler, just give you enough beakers for the cheepest tech on its list you dont know yet. So, if you didnt know monotheism or masonry, then a GP would only give you the number of beakers that monotheism costs currently, toward civil service, or whatever tech.

This is VERY reasonable.

I would be against banning BSR or avoiding masonry. These are examples of people discovering something "clever", not an exploit. Preventing people finding ways of beating the higher levels is unavoidable. IMO we should not try to ban something whenever someone discovers a new tactic to win at these levels. You may say "But these tactics now become the only way to win at these levels! Think about variety!". But that's because they have only just been discovered. Given time, a number of new strategies will be discovered an there will be plenty more options. Soon we'll be against the "building a library, hiring 2 scientists and founding Taoism" tactic. Then we'll be limiting the number of suicide catapults. I just think that things like these are a slippery slope, and are only percieved as a problem because alternate strategies are yet to be discovered.

I support this point of view - lets not make it "only one right way to play" game by expanding the exploit list.
I have been playing/administrating some internet games. We sometime needed to ban/change something in the game because it gave too much advantage for Players. There was criterium for this:
If the "exploit" was giving advantage because Players outsmarted the other Players it was OK with us.
If Players spending many hours at the game could amass small advantages leading to secure (ureachable by other means) position we banned/changed.

The main idea is not to punish Players for thinking - just secure even chances.
If U ban too much brilliant Players can't spread their wings.

I would also point out that here in RB Players SHARE his/her knowledge, tricks and gameplay style.
Everybody has the possibility to use prechops, BRS or prevent Masonry. It is ones decision if it is sound for the current game played.

The only exploit I would consider braking the game (uneven) is snatching the worker from the AI, because it is mostly dependent on luck and can lead to ureachable by other means beefits for a Player who only had the luck to find such worker. I did so in epic 3 but was unaware that AI is not capable of preventing.