Mumblefratz Mumblefratz

The MVL Rulebook

The MVL Rulebook

This is where we will keep all the rules used for the Metaverse League (MVL). The point is to have a single place where all rules are defined and so there's a single place where people can refer to resolve all question.

I will continually update this OP to reflect the current state of rules that we have all agreed to. The point is to make this as simple and concise as possible. As we have seen argument and upset occurs when different people have different interpretations of what has been agreed. Keeping these rules as simple and short as possible will help reduce potential conflict.



Rule 1) Rule changes are not allowed in the middle of a round. If an unanticipated situation develops in the middle of a round all effort should be made to deal with it as consistently as possible based on current rules and precedent. In the hopefully rare cases this is not possible the Commissioner will make an arbitrary ruling on how the matter will be resolved for the current round. Once the round is over then the issue can be revisited and a more permanent solution can be decided by the members of the League. Note that this arbitrary ruling can only be made by the Commissioner. Also the Commissioner is the only person that can grant an exception to any rule, but this power should be used judiciously.

Rule 2) Team Size. People may join the League and start playing at pretty much anytime. In the middle of a round a new player should be randomly assigned a new team by either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner. The only limitation is that at any point in time no team should have more than one more player than any other team.

Also people may have to announce that they can't submit during a round. This can be treated using the scoring rules related to non-submission or if it's early in the round the teams could be re-balanced by the Commissioner. The decision to re-balance or not, and if so who to move, is soley the decision of the Commissioner.

The ideal team size is 5 since it provides some protection against an unforeseen non-submittal without being too unweildly. Team size at the beginning of a round should never be less than 4 or more than 6.

Rule 3) Honor System. Each round of play consists of a game (or games) of randomly selected settings and victory conditions. Very few of the required settings can be verified, namely galaxy size and victory condition. The fact that all other settings cannot be verified requires the league to operate on the honor system.

From time to time various versions of the game may exhibit a bug that temporarily allows some particular exploit. When and if this happens people should make sure the league is aware of the situation but no rule will be made to prohibit the particular exploit other than the same honor system that ensures everyone is playing the same game.

A final point about the honor system is that abuse of the honor system doesn't debase a single game played by a single player but debases every game played by every player. When seen in this light I'm sure that no one would be tempted to risk shaking the foundation of the league just to gain a miniscule benefit by intentionally bending a setting or rule. Also everyone should realize that honest mistakes do happen and if occasionally someone makes a mistake in a required game setting that it's no real big deal.

A corollary to the fact that only galaxy size and victory condition can be verified, along with the practice of taking a game submitted to the metaverse but not submitted to the league as a persons "intended" league submission, results in the rule that people should not have games submitted to the metaverse under their league character that might be confused with a legitimate league game. Note that clearly once a player has made a submission for the current round there can be no such confusion.

Honor System Addendum

The deliberate and determined use by a Player, with full knowledge and intent, of repeatedly and excessively, exploiting bugs, quirks, or other miscellanea in a game to achieve an outcome not normally possible is hereby prohibited in the MVL.

Rule 4) Reported Difficulty Levels and Race Customization in MVL Games

Every MVL player is honor bound to ensure that the effective difficulty of any game they submit is accurately represented by the games posted difficulty. To support this requirement the following guidance is provided.

External modification of any game related files are prohibited in MVL games.

In-game modification of opponent characteristics is prohibited in MVL games. The only choices allowed are the selection of opponents from among the default standard races and default custom race and the selection of their difficulty levels.

All opponent starting relations must be set to "Unknown".

DA games must be set to Allow Surrenders.

Rule 5) MVL Member Behavior

In the case where a MVL member has been found to be cheating, being overly disruptive, or detrimental to the League in some form, the commissioner is free to levy the following punishments as he deems necessary and appropriate. Such punishments may include; the loss of a team Captaincy or other MVL Administrative Position, the loss of the Player's points earned in a particular Round, forcing the Player to sit out a Round, or any other temporary punishment deemed appropriate.

For anything deemed worthy of a permanent ban from the league then besides the recommendation of the commissioner it should also require the consensus of the captains and other MVL administrators to make the ban permanent. Once banned then continued disruption of MVL threads and activities will be appropriately reported to forum authorities.



Scoring

A team's score consists of the sum of "base" scores plus individual and team bonus points.

Base Score

A player's base score is simply 2 points for a win of the designated type, 1 point for a win of the wrong type and 0 points otherwise. A team’s base score is the sum of the four top player base scores submitted. This is done so that a team having more players has no advantage over a team with fewer players.

There are two types of rounds that are treated slightly differently. One is a “Single Victory” type round where all players play for the same victory condition. The other is an “All Victories” type round where each team must submit at least one game of each of the 4 different victory types.

Non-Submission

In the Single Victory round if a player neglects to submit a game then there is no issue as long as the team still has at least four other players that submitted a game. However, if the team only had four players to begin with then they would be missing one potential contribution to the team’s base score. If this non-submission is pre-announced (this is highly encouraged), then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select another member of the team to submit another game to count towards the teams base score.

In the case where no notice is given, if the player has a single game that fits the rounds criteria as to date, galaxy size and victory condition posted to the Metaverse but not yet submitted to the league then that game will be presumed to be submitted "automatically" to the league during the last minute of the round. If there are more than one qualifying game posted to the metaverse under the players MVL character than the game with the highest score/year ratio will be the game submitted to the league. If two or more games have identical score/year ratios then the submitted game shall be randomly selected from these games by the commissioner or vice commissioner whichever is not a memeber of the team in question. Note that players should make sure that any games that "appear" to match the current rounds criteria posted to the MV do indeed satisfy all the current rounds criteria. This can always be accomplished by simply waiting until your official has been made before posting a game to the MV that might otherwise be confused with the current MVL game.

In the case where no notice is given, and if other members of the team have other games that satisfy the round’s criteria that have already been submitted to the metaverse then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select one of these games to count towards the teams base score. In this case the team should identify *all* such games that satisfy the round’s criteria for possible selection not simply the *best* such game.

If the non-submission is not pre-announced and the team has no “extra” qualifying games then the team gets credit only for the number of base scores properly submitted.

Note that a team of 5 players with two players that failed to submit a game would be in a similar situation as described above and the same rules apply. The same is true with 6 players and 3 non-submissions, etc. It is also possible for a team to be more than one submission short of the required total of 4 in which case the same rules can be applied to possibly allow the team to make up for more than one non-submission.

Finally these same rules apply in the case of an All Victories round but with an extra qualification. This extra requirement is that in an All Victories round each team is required to submit at least one game of each victory type. In this case the team may be required to use an “extra” game as described by the rules above that duplicates the victory type of an already submitted game. In this case for base scoring purposes that game would have to be considered a 1 point victory of the wrong type. Note that such a game could still receive individual and team bonus points based on the correct victory category.

Individual Bonus Points

In the case of a Single Victory round a single bonus point is granted for the 4 top scoring games and the 4 fastest games.

In the case of an All Victory round a single bonus point is given to the top score and the fastest game in each of the 4 different victory conditions.

The fastest games are determined by the number of years reported by the metaverse. Game speed ties are broken by score and score ties are broken by speed. Any games tied in both speed and score will be left unbroken and both players will receive the identical bonus.

Team Bonus Points

All team bonus points are based on the average of the team’s submitted games. Just as in the individual bonus point case only wins of the correct type are counted. The 1st place team receives 2 points and the 2nd place team receives 1 point in the following categories.

Team Score

Team Speed (speed of game reported by metaverse)

Team Submission (number of days into the round before game is submitted to the league)

Any teams tied in any team bonus category receive the same bonus. However, any fractional result is not subject to rounding and any tie must be exact.



MVL Voting Rules

1. Any MVL member can call for a vote among any number of competing proposals which must be seconded by two other MVL members to be considered official.

2. All votes will occur in the Galciv II Metaverse Leagues forum at the Core and notice must also be given in the current MVL Round thread.

3. All votes should run for a period of time specified in the OP of the voting thread. This period should be no shorter than 1 week or longer than 3 weeks. It's encouraged but not required that votes should be completed before the start of the next round of play if at all possible.

4. A valid vote requires participation by at least 50% of active MVL members. An abstention counts as participation. A proposal requires 60% or more of the cast ballots to be accepted. If less than 60% is achieved by any one proposal there will be a runoff between the two most popular options. The winner of the runoff will be the proposal that achieves a simple majority of votes cast with no quorum requirement.

5. Editing of your vote is allowed although any changes should be made in such a way as to make it obvious that a change has occured.

6. Once the time specified for the vote expires the thread will be locked to maintain an accurate record of the vote. The results of any vote are final and can only be changed by a subsequent official MVL vote.

Rules accepted by Consensus

From time to time minor issues may crop up that may not warrent the full attention of the League. In such cases a limited number of members may discuss the issue and come to some agreement. As long as no member of the league voices any objection to such an agreement and as long as such an agreement has been posted in a prominent thread (the current round thread or the MVL Rule thread) for a period of one week then that rule will be considered to be "official" by the league.

Besides any MVL member voicing an objection to the proposed rule, thereby invalidating the proposal, any member could also move to have a vote taken on the proposal which, as specified in our voting rules, requires a vote be taken as long as the motion is seconded by two other MVL members.



Last update Mar 28, 2008. Added Race Configuration Rule and Honor System Addendum

 

691,368 views 452 replies
Reply #251 Top
I think that for MVL games, people should be allowed to use the customization available within the game, but not edit the raceconfig files directly.

Kzinti empire2.JPG Sentient species taste better...

Reply #252 Top
Well, look at what you *can* edit that has any effect on the game, it's a very small group of characteristics, basically alignment, homeworld, and super ability. To quote Purge, think of it as advanced race configuration.

Personally, I don't like things inundated with rules and the MVL already has its share. I don't have a problem with it and I think it should be allowed.

Thanks
Reply #253 Top
Basically to express the concern that had been expressed to me is that the modification of custom races from outside of the game by editing of raceconfig files is just not fair. It's not fair to DL players nor is it fair to DA players that don't make the same out of game modifications.

These aren't neccessairly my own personal opinion but that are the opinions of at least one and probably more members of the MVL. Whether you agree with them or not you must admit that there is some validity tothis opinion.

Anyway what do you think?
Reply #254 Top
Personally, I don't like things inundated with rules and the MVL already has its share.

Like I said I am merely passing on the opinions of another MVL member. I'm personally not overly fond of a infinite amount of rules either regardless of appearances to the contrary. However I can't simply ignore a members request. If it was your request then you'd thank me (at least I hope you would).
Reply #255 Top
Anyway what do you think?

There's a certain amount of unfairness between DL and DA at best. The two games play quite different without any other consideration. Depending on game configuration, you may be able to gain an advantage playing DL over DA or vice versa. The "not fair to DL" argument doesn't hold water AFAIC. Modification of the raceconfig file is not something with limited access. The file is in plain text and it's a simple task to make the available modifications. I just don't see the problem. The MVL does not specify all possible settings when configuring races so why should they specify this one? That's just my opinion, but I'll inevitibly go along with whatever decision is made.
Reply #256 Top
I'm not really ready to give my thoughts on the Advanced Race Customization as of yet...but going along with what Craig is saying...at what point is customization considered an issue? In DA a person can go in directly in the screens and greatly change how the AI behaves, going as far as making them Extremely Pacifist. This does prevent a Difficulty of Suicidal but it still leaves you at Obscene, not exactly "punishment" for what could be a very easy game. And this is an option that is DIRECTLY available in the game, not in the race files.

My only thought/concern is that these are all things that can't be checked either against a player. And my worry with this road is that we could easily go down a road of about setting the Relations status at the start of the game (which is limited to Friendly or lower in a MV game) or even what AIs the player picks, such as is it wrong to pick a bunch of "straw-man" AIs?

I'm not giving my opinion on the matter at hand LOL, I just want to point out to everyone that this is a very slippery slope and needs to be thought over carefully.
Reply #257 Top
That's just my opinion

All opinions are valid opinions and I thank you for making them. At this point we're just trying to get a sense of where the league stands on the issue.

I'd like to just let this sit for a bit and see how everyone else feels. If it's obvious that the feelings are in one direction then we can act on it. If the sides seem balanced we can try to make some kind of compromise or if no compromise seems likely we can simply take it to a vote.

In any case we need responses from a good sampling of other members before we begin to know where we stand.

Reply #258 Top
Personally, I think one function of competition is to push the edges of what is possible within a ruleset, without going past the boundaries. This contributes to the collective knowledge of what is possible with the game and thus makes the game more interesting. "Advanced Race Configuration" expands the range of possible strategies, (most probably) decreases the likelyhood of every player who wishes to compete on speed/score adopting the same set-up (notice the proliferation of Korath and to a lesser extent Yor last round), and in my opinion makes the game more interesting. It can also enhance the team nature of the competition, with each team holding internal disscussions of possible custom configurations and likely adopting similar set ups. Then the competion becomes more between teams than between collections of individuals.

I also think that it makes the game a lot more interesting. The variance in the settings between one round to the other makes it unlikely that one grouping of home planet, super ability, alignment and race will gain overall dominance (in other words, I don't think people will have to play as evil super breeder krynn starting on New Iconia to be competitive, though that may be a flexible and generally decent option.)

The point that this is a clear advantage for DA players is a fair one. I do not know how many players are still using DA on a consistent basis. However, I think the gap between DA with advanced race configuration allowed and DL is likely to be significantly less than the difference between Twilight and DA. The more variables that exist, the more chances the human has to manipulate them more effectively than the AIs are able to, and so the greater the relative advantage of the human player (though the AI should be significantly stronger as well for Twlight). Super abilities, the extra races, the advanced configuration options and starting with a miner all fall under this category for DA. I think that the unique tech trees will outweigh all of that. Unless we ban TA, there are going to be marked differences between the different versions of the game. It's a difficult issue. I'd hate to lose the advanced race configuration option (which I personally have not used yet, but was really looking forward to in the future), but I also understand the need for fairness between the different versions of the game. I guess, overall, I feel such editing is a net positive. Honestly, if I only had DL, I may feel differently. If I had to vote though, it would be to keep it.
Reply #259 Top
I don't see a problem with this. If we allow "straw dog" opponents, this should be allowed as well.

In case you don't know what a "straw dog" opponent is...

In latest MVL round, round 7, we must face 4 opponents. You could set up 4 custom super-traders with the Iconian AI, and give them crappy abilities and starting techs. Even at suicidal these "straw dogs" play a lot easier than pre-defined races.
Reply #260 Top
Dont agree with changing homeworlds or making your opponents easier either. Or changing Superabilities. It definately will give an advantage to those who are better on a computer than others.
I never thought this topic would ever come up because I didnt think anyone would do it. However this is just my opinion.
Reply #261 Top
Is the issue here, a matter of someones belief that using Advance Race Customization is not in the spirit of the league or it is unethical, or is it sour grapes that some people cannot make these changes and so wish to eliminate them for everyone else. I say this as i know of players who have expressed that very idea. Since they do not have the knowledge to create an ACR they feel no-one else should be able to use them either. The two schools of thought are easily blurred.

That being said, im not accusing anyone of this but simply bringing all the possible scenario's into perspective.

The main i reason i say this is i can't see what problem someone has with this method. It is a legitimate feature of the game that is Metaverse legal. Just because the changes are made outside of the game UI does not mean it is nefarious, no more so than adding your own race logo's and portriats. I know i am nit picking here, but where do we stop at stating what can and cannot be changed.

Another reason i see this as a non issue is that it does not make enough of a difference to matter. Take last round for instance. I used a ACR and i was outscored and had a 2 year game amongst a plethora of ZYW's. They are simply not that powerful to affect the game that much.

If we are going to outlaw the ARC then we should include which race must be used by the player in the round settings. Someone using the Altarians this round would have an advantage over me using the Iconian's, and that should not be allowed.

Ohh yeah...I can just change my race, didn't think of that... ;p

If there are players out there who cannot make these changes, i would be happy to make a race to their liking. It is as simple as copying and pasting the text.
Reply #262 Top
As I've gone over this today, debating my thoughts on it, I've only been able to hear one voice in my head...and that is the voice of US President Andrew Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

I really, really, don't want to get into everyone having to submit endgamesaves to the admins to check over, its absolutely ridiculous. So, on that alone, unfortunately it's a moot issue. It's not that I don't agree or disagree, though I am partial to the fact that using 'stock' characteristics is fine with me, its just that there is absolutely no way to enforce this without, in my mind, irreparably damaging the MVL.

I of course will support the MVL members on any course of action they will take but I am announcing now that I will take neither side in the matter as to me, saying its ok is giving a blank check and saying it is not ok is tantamount to calling other players cheaters. That is my position and take it as you want.
Reply #263 Top
I've used them and I like using them. I'm not sure if they give me any particular advantage. With last round I used one but ended up with a much better game using DL1.5.

In most of the rounds I have tried the game with both DL and DA and really I don't feel that DL is really at much of a disadvantage. It's easier to get the quick kill with DA, but your also dealing with a tighter economy and that becomes a factor on these small maps. I really haven't seen much difference in planets counts either. In some rounds I've had more planets with DL.

Oops got a little off topic there :). Basically I'm for using them and I don't really think anyone is at much of a disadvantage because of it.

Reply #264 Top
Personally, I see little to no advantage in using "advanced race customization". Like others here, I've used the stock DL races exclusively in my MVL games and have remained fairly competitive. I don't feel that I've been playing at a disadvantage.

I have no intention of using it in my MVL games, but don't care if others want to. In that light, I'm siding with Silverbeacher in abstaining from taking sides.

As far as sending the endgame.sav to the admins, I'm not sure where that came up. It's a rather ridiculous idea though.
Reply #265 Top
As far as sending the endgame.sav to the admins, I'm not sure where that came up. It's a rather ridiculous idea though.


I brought that up to point out that there is no way to enforce this, and if people DO want us too, that's the only way to do it. In my personal opinion, the minute players need to send in games to be checked is the minute the MVL is over.
Reply #266 Top
I really, really, don't want to get into everyone having to submit endgamesaves to the admins to check over, its absolutely ridiculous. So, on that alone, unfortunately it's a moot issue. It's not that I don't agree or disagree, though I am partial to the fact that using 'stock' characteristics is fine with me, its just that there is absolutely no way to enforce this without, in my mind, irreparably damaging the MVL.

I agree that endgame.sav submission is beyond reasonable, but I would like to point out that there are many things we do that are in no way provable or enforceable and we all simply rely on the honor system.

I do believe that any decision in this regard would count on the honor system just as we already count on it to feel comfortable that no one selects abundant planets when the settings call for rare. So the question of enforcement of any rule in this regard is really a moot question. Any rule against this so called ARC is enforced in exactly the same manner that any rule of the MVL is enforced, by the honor of it's members.

Also to answer a question neilo brought up about the possible motivation for this request being a question of fairness or just "sour grapes". I truly believe that the motivation for this request is a question of fairness.

Finally my own personal opinion of the question is that I honestly don't see this as that big a deal. I view this in two parts. The first is customization of your own race. Basically it allows alignment selection, super ability selection and homeplanet selection, and honestly I agree with those that say this is a minor tweak and not some gigantic advantage.

The second part of this is the selection of customized "weak" opponents. Actually I think this part of it is something that I could see as being slightly more objectionable. But really what is the difference. Can't anyone do this to some extent by choosing the Korx and Iconians instead of the Torian and the Drengin? Isn't that really the same thing? And even if it isn't the same thing at worst it's perhaps like playing one difficulty lower than you're used to.

Most folks other than those that play exclusively suicidal seem to have a mix of games at a couple of difficulty levels. In these cases no one complains if someone that has games at both tough and challenging decides to submit a game at challenging. So is it that big a deal if that same person decides to submit a game at tough but use weaker opponents? It seems hardly any difference.

I'm not sure we have a trend here but my subjective opinion says that most people either favor leaving it as it is or are neutral between the choice.

I would like to propose something that may give everyone a little bit of everything and is a way to at least hold out an olive branch to those that dislike this.

How would people feel about a rule that allows ARC for your own race but prohibits it for the selection of opponents. Is it possible that this could be at least partially acceptable to those that don't like this practice? Could it also be a minor point given up by those like this practice to help the folks that don't like it feel just a touch better about the situation?

To be brutally honest I think if we really push this to a vote that the end result would be no change to the current practice. This was my expectation when this was brought to my attention however I can't ignore the concerns expressed by any MVL member even if it turns out there are very few that actually feel this way.
Reply #267 Top
Note to self.

Silver mentioned setting relations. I did check and the idea of setting relations was discussed in the round 4 thread (alliance win) where there seemed to be consensus that relations should always be set to unknown. However it appears that I never recorded such a rule. This should be brought up but only after the current question is resolved one way or another.

Reply #268 Top
I agree with Mumble after thinking a little more on the idea. Make your own race if you have to. However I am strongly against what Ferral calls "straw dogs", I believe that would be going a little too far. As for "sour grapes" absolutely not, just cold beer ;) 
Reply #269 Top
Has it ever been brought up to assign what race must be played and who your opponents are? I'd like to see something like, Torian Revenge. Torians vs. Drengin, Korath, and Humans. Or some other themed round. Something loosely based on the mythology of the campaign.

That would certainly get around our current discussion and may help players in the MVL learn new playing styles. I, for one, have not played all races. It would certainly challenge me.
Reply #270 Top
Also to answer a question neilo brought up about the possible motivation for this request being a question of fairness or just "sour grapes". I truly believe that the motivation for this request is a question of fairness.


I certainly do not mean to say that the person/s that brought this up has the attitude of sour grapes, but i do know that there are people who feel this way.

I certainly would agree that creating weaker oponents is far more powerful than using ARC's. Creating a custom race with no SA's and wasting the ability points and assigning less important techs and then playing against 4 of those opponents is far more unbalancing than using a ARC. And remember you can create that straw dog from within the game UI.

I would not have an issue banning these opponents but it then leads me to ask, if we ban the creating of weak customs to use, should we then not assign who our opponents are for that round. The Ai you play against can be the difference between a win and a loss, not so much when we must play against many AI, but last round for instance people could have choose the Iconians as their opponents. They would have had an easier time than those that left the setting to random.

Now i don't see much difference between the two, if its unfair to create a weak race for an enemy, is it not just as unfair to select an already weak race. Same can be said for the use of ARC's. If people's opinion is that these races are more powerful, than it should be also unfair to play as the Kyrnn as opposed to someone playing as the Iconians.

In the end i see it as a all or nothing situation. We either leave it as it is now, with the choices of race and opponents in the players hands, or we specify which race to play against and which race to use. That can be partially confirmed.

I'm in favor of leaving it as it is now, though if we were to ban the straw dogs, i'd have no problems with that proposal either.

Reply #271 Top
Strawdogs being banned seems to be the best bet, as for screenshots, Everybody is quite trustworthy on that. Besides we want to encourage more people to come aboard.
Reply #272 Top
There are possibly other ideas that have been brought up. Ferrel mentions the idea of specifying the race as part of the game configuration. It's an idea but I'm not sure how practical it is. To be DL/DA agnostic that would restrict races to the DL races only.

Also the idea is to keep everyones game similar but not identical. Certainly that could be another way to play this is for one person to check out a game and save it and then everyone play that identical game. But there are many problems with this idea as well. How do you handle different difficulties. Certainly only one of these games can be submitted to the MV.

The league is clearly a compromise between the desire for each player to play *similar* games but still leave some level of player input into configuration as well. Certainly good play will beat bad play with identical setups but isn't it also part of the game to intelligently use racial ability points, political party selection, race selection as well as in game strategy? In fact as we've seen there is no one best racial, ability and party choice because the best choices in these categories will go hand in hand with what your in game strategy will be.

I have thought that a shared game start for individual tournaments would be an interesting idea to implement but not within the context of the MVL.

I'd still like to hear input from others in the league that haven't yet shared their feelings but from what I'm seeing I don't see any real support for eliminating this practice although I do see some willingness to say that it should be prohibited for opponents.

For those that truly dislike this that might not seem like much of a concession but like I said we can if folks wish push this to a vote and see how that works out but my guess of the outcome of that vote would most likely end up with no change whatsoever.

I'd hate to lose even a single member over this issue so please if anyone feels strongly in either direction over this issue you need to let us know if this proposed compromise helps at all.
Reply #273 Top
Sorry I've been on hiatus for awhile but just wanted to say something on the matter rather then nothing.

Straw Dogs, thats obviously an advantage.
As for ARC, although I wouldn't say that it is not an advantage, its certainly not a be-all end-all advantage or even a very big one at that.. How you play, come up with the best way to use an ARC, spend your money, etc is still up to you.
...But as for advantage over DL, just as much advantage as inherent race abilities and SAs provide but as you all know there are drawbacks to DA too.

For those that truly dislike this that might not seem like much of a concession but like I said we can if folks wish push this to a vote and see how that works out but my guess of the outcome of that vote would most likely end up with no change whatsoever.


I confess I use ARC most of the time and so would be expected to vouch for it, but I wouldn't say this calls for a vote. Anyway, I'll go with the Silver on this. Whichever way the league decides, I'll go with that.
Reply #274 Top
I dont have a very strong opinion one way or the other. Originally I said that I thought editting the raceconfig files should not be allowed, but after seeing that you can only change a few things, I dont view it as a problem. My initial reply was based more on my experience with computer games over the last 20 years, where on occassion I have gone and screwed around with the game files in circumstances where I thought the game was grossly unfair or the parameters made the game not very fun. Mostly though, I refrain from doing that because I generally like to experience the game as it was intended. X-Com and Colonization are two games that immediately come to mind where I did edit the game files...for X-Com I made it so my soldiers actually had some skills to begin with, and werent just cannon fodder! ;) I havent editted anything with GalCiv2, because there are so many options with setup and strategy within the game, that for myself I dont feel the need to take that step.

I'm usually for minimizing rules, so taking that into account too, I dont see any need for an additional rule.

Kzinti empire2.JPG Sentient species taste better...
Reply #275 Top
Ah yes, we did talk about the setting of Relations; though i think we had agreed to that they should always be set to Unknown. Anyhow, I'm for that.

I do have to agree with Neilo that its kinda an all or nothing scenario. Even in DL you can choose weaker opponents and drop their abilities (esp. since in DL few abilities are actually inherent, which means stock races can actually be weaker in DL vs DA).

But...that being said, even that I don't see as big of an issue as some are. On the highest difficulties the AI, with any race or ethical choice or personality, is still going to out colonize you, out research you, and out produce you. They are still getting their 300% (?) bonuses not withstanding and they still use the most advanced logarithms.

And you start looking at your lower difficulty levels, the AI is hamstrung anyhow.

I don't necc. agree with using straw man opponents, but I don't really see it as a huge benefit to the player either.

I think that this game is remarkably well balanced and the AI is incredible and the little things we do aren't gonna make that big of a difference one way or another.