|
Post by ajerzguy on Jan 12, 2006 16:38:09 GMT -5
What am I expected to do when a player quits (for whatever reason) and doesn't retire and I get eliminated by the AI that took over the civ?
Am I supposed to report to all those that were still in the game even though it is highly likely that I will have to chase the player that was the cause of it? This is also very disconcerting since the game started without barbarians.
What's this rule that a player should not retire when he leaves? It is my understanding that if a player retires the AI does not take over the civ. Am I wrong? If there is a program glitch with retiring why should a player that "hung in there" be penalized?
Since there was no "hot join" in C3C this was never a concern.
As always I'll do what is right, however I don't think it is fair to anyone in this situation.
|
|
|
Post by SirPartyMan on Jan 13, 2006 19:46:29 GMT -5
I am sorry Ajerz. You are the victim of a bug. We are stuck with a current patch 1.52 where several bad things can happen when a player drops/quits/retires whatever.
First, of all, everyone, listen up, please STOP using the "retire" or ALT-Q function until/unless a new patch fixes it. Right now, as soon as one person does this, your game might freeze, or an AI on steroids might take over, noobs might join your game and take over for the AI. etc. etc. It's a disaster waiting to happen. Nobody retire please. Use EXIT TO DESKTOP or EXIT TO MAIN MENU, please.
Getting back to your problem: I think there are two possibilities here when this kind of thing happens.
First, the players could agree to scrap the game - if it's only turn 1 you probably do scrap - if it's turn 120 you probably don't. But each situation is different. It should be considered and discussed.
Second, you accept the game result as official. Of course, we don't report to the AI. But if they kill us, we're dead and we owe reports to the living, as much as that sucks.
I have made Firaxis aware of this situation and I believe it will be addressed in the next patch. I believe there will be some way to have the quitter's civ disappear when they leave the game.
For the time being, yeah you should report.
Best, SPM
PS: Barbarians and the AI are two different things. No matter what game option set you pick in 1.52, the AI will take over for a player who leaves the game under any conditions, unless they are dead (i.e. have zero cities).
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Jan 14, 2006 5:52:27 GMT -5
No offence to Firaxis or anyone who programmed the AI, I'm sure it's exactly as demanding as you need for a good game. But IMO the AI is slowed(r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d) gotta love that web nanny ;D, I've had him next to me before and the wave and then sledge method is fine if you don't know its coming. Totally predictable that dude, Personally he's on my DNP list
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Jan 14, 2006 8:52:55 GMT -5
Actually, on higher levels (where the production advantages are such that AI tactics become more clear) it also engages a Choke strategy, too. Maybe we'll get a Dagger-type strategy in the expansion. ;D
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jan 14, 2006 13:51:48 GMT -5
i guess the "choke strategy" is more like a "hm, lets move some warriors around " strategy like in civ3 - where these dudes moved in all levels same way but just increased in numbers in higher levels
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jan 15, 2006 12:20:13 GMT -5
Hmmmm ok i didnt realize this post was about me until i got all the non-reports filled.
As much as i appreciate your situation Ajerz, you must admit the game was a nonsense.
Lets see we started with 6 players, the game starts to lagg like crazy, then after 10 mins 1 guy quits.
Then we are down 5, more lag then someone drops after another 10 mins. we wait 8 mins and he comes back, 5 mins later he drops again. Another 9 minute wait and hes back. The 5 minutes after that the game crashes for all. Im in the lobby screaming "I cant connect" like a million times. Grimach also in the lobby screaming the same thing, yet you guys carry on, with 3 players. After 15 mins or whatever it is, i manage to reconnect to find only half the original players in there and AI has totally screwed my civ over. About another 5 mins after that grimach manages to connect, AI has messed his civ up aswell, but hes like "im first who cares" not realizing hes first cuz AI has been building silly stuff and as a result his population has momentarily gone up.
So im like this is not a game, and go join another one, and to my surprise one of the original 3 is also in this game. So you completed that game with only 2 of the original players plus grim who joined after AI had played half his game.
I will do the reports now, but OMFG since when did common sense become so uncommon?
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Jan 15, 2006 13:59:45 GMT -5
I think you should report on the score or scrap, there should be some compensation but the game should not have continued IMO. That game should of been scrapped, the host really had no right to keep trying at that point. I had to scrap today after people kept dropping and it lagged. If it happens three times then you should be asking the question scrap? if people say no fair enough? But to have carried on when people clearly couldn't connect in the lobby is very poor sportsmanship IMO. I would and will reload if anyone can't connect in the lobby because atm far too many people are having problems(I have scrapped after hosting a direct ip that not everyone could get into regardless of what we tried), I don't care how many times they've dropped, if you want to blindly bang your head against your keyboards saying rule is rules is rules is rules then I suggest you play with someone else because I believe it's in the best interest of fair play to use your discretion. Tony trust me - I'm not necessarily refering to this situation, I'm sure the players were just trying to follow the rules - there are some really analy retentive people out there, they usually ended up as management in offices or as administrators or pointless beureaucrats, fortuanately they are rare on the ladder. We happen on this ladder to have admins who try to be fair and try to uphold the spirit of the law rather than the letter; however there are always going to be those who can't or wont use there own judgement in that situation. I sugest you refuse to play with them in future, they do more harm than good if they can't play fairly. Actually, on higher levels (where the production advantages are such that AI tactics become more clear) it also engages a Choke strategy, too. Maybe we'll get a Dagger-type strategy in the expansion. ;D Well AI are limited by just how smart you can make a computer opponent. Too smart and the game is ruined because it's too difficult, too stupid and you just end up running amock over them. Thus difficulty levels have to let the computer cheat because it's extremely difficult to get computers as they stand now that think creatively or play unpredictably. I bet a computer wouldn't think of deliberately stunting it's growth to avoid people attacking it and then go on to outscore the ones who ignored you;) hehe that's quite ingenius, likewise I seen some pretty fine bits of intuitive thinking from players that it's an honour to then get beat by ;D I agree you should report, don't feel to hard done by it's likely they would have won anyway. But I wouldn't be filing a non report necessarily if a host decided to continue like that. It's entirely people I referred to that can't use judgement that bertrand russel was talking about and you can take the bit about them dying as meaning they die because of it Civ is like chess but with the world as a battlefield not a board.
|
|