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

 

691,228 views 452 replies
Reply #301 Top
I agree with CraigHB that a MVL that specified race configurations would be less interesting. Mumblefratz has also summed up my position more clearly than I did, so nice job on that (I need to learn to express myself more concisely). :)

Additionally, I want to respond to a comparison made earlier between ARC and performance enhancing drugs. I can understand being opposed to ARC and feeling that it was unethical, but I do not think this specific comparison is entirely fair.

The problem with performance enhancing drugs is not really that they enhance performance. Many things enhance performance, such as superior sports medicine, scouting, practice, sophisticated conditioning regimines and athletically optimized diets. Everything on that list is considered both ethical and a good idea, so long as it is done within the rules. The primary objection to performance enhancing drugs is that they cause, or reasonably could be believed to cause, physical harm to those who use them, and that if they were allowed every competitor would be forced to use them or be left behind. In other words, allowing performance enhancing drugs would force athletes to sacrifice their health or get out of the game.

The other reason performance enhancing drugs are unethical is that they are against the rules of every major sport. This fact means that to use them is to break the rules. If existing rules did not ban them, this objection would not be valid. In the MVL, ARC is not currently against the rules, so using it is not currently unethical on the basis of violating established rules (though one could view it as unethical for other reasons). I think it seems rather circular to assert that it is unethical for the reason that it violates rules that one feels should be in place (though again, one could feel it is unethical for other reasons, and thus it should be against the rules).

ARC has no known health risks. It is not currently forbidden by Metaverse or Metaverse League rules. Anyone with the DA expansion can use it, and Neilo has volunteered to help those who lack the editing experience to use ARC independently, so there should be limited problems with access. So if everyone (or nearly everyone) can use it, it is not harmful to health, and is not against current rules, I personally do not think performance enhancing drugs are a fair comparison.
Reply #302 Top
In the MVL, ARC is not currently against the rules, so using it is not currently unethical on the basis of violating established rules (though one could view it as unethical for other reasons).

I don't think anyone seriously compared ARC to HGH or Steroids but if they did then you make a compelling argument that the comparison is invalid.

However I want to take your statement that ARC is not currently against the rules one step further than that. Yes it's true that ARC is not against the rules but more than that by simply being the established status quo one could legitimately consider that it is explictly allowed by precedent.

In fact to continue allowing the use of ARC in my mind requires no new rule and it's de facto already defined as legal within the MVL. To change this would require a new rule to explicitly disallow it.

Saying that it's not illegal (double negative, passive acceptance) is far weaker than the actual situation which is that it's specifically allowed by precedent that has existed for an extended period of time.
Reply #303 Top
Hmm, I had no idea we could change the race config in these ways and still play a legal metaverse game. Now that I know, I do not plan to use it.To be quite honest, it does seem unethical to me; much like an athlete using steroids is. The fact that anyone can make these changes does not mean that it should be done. And the fact that we can't really regulate against it doesn't mean we should allow it either.I guess the crux of the problem is that Stardock isn't tagging these games as illegal, when I think they probably should be. I agree that this probably was not intentional, and I hope that it will be corrected in the future.If we're taking this to a vote, mine will be against allowing this.


This was the post that I was responding to, which to me seemed to quite clearly compare ARC to steroids. I agree that you are right that allowing ARC is essentially established precedent and that a rule change would be needed to ban it, but not to allow it. Thank you for the correction. :)
Reply #304 Top
The reason I am for 3 is as follows
You want to make an ARC great, I have no problem. however you could make the Drengin Good or make all your oppents take the supertrader ability with crappy abilities which would put them at a huge disadvantage. (wheres the sport in that)

The MVL has to be flexible and as level playing field as possible, If all is allowed, I still will not use it, maybe in a gigantic empire game to really clean house. I mean take away the Terrans Diplomatic Superability and they become fodder. I guess the same goes for the Drath.

We as players get to choose our own abilities, the AI is in my opinion a player, so let them choose their own abilities and the Superabiliy that was given them. Do whatever you like with your own player. I mean in first player shooters you can give yourself infinte ammo and invincibility.
Reply #305 Top
To clarify, I just posted my opinion. As far as a vote, I abstain. It doesn't matter to me which way this goes.

Reply #306 Top
This was the post that I was responding to, which to me seemed to quite clearly compare ARC to steroids. I agree that you are right that allowing ARC is essentially established precedent and that a rule change would be needed to ban it, but not to allow it. Thank you for the correction.

I did notice that but I just felt the steroid analogy was itself a distraction to begin with and therefore any response to it was just leading the conversation in the wrong direction even though I agreed with your analysis as to why the comparison was invalid.

The true essence of my post was to make the distinction between "not illegal" and a practice that has a long established precedent.

We as players get to choose our own abilities, the AI is in my opinion a player, so let them choose their own abilities and the Superabiliy that was given them.

Very valid argument. Part of the reason I proposed the option in the first place although an attempt to appeal to both sides was probably my primary concern.

To clarify, I just posted my opinion. As far as a vote, I abstain. It doesn't matter to me which way this goes.

That's fine.



Actually, of all the people responding to this topic I probably care least of all which way this gets decided. The practice personally doesn't bother me in the slightest. Keep it, ban it, I really don't care personally. I do have some slight intellectual concept of fair play that maybe sees a touch of concern, but I really don't see this as amounting to much in the way of any kind of advantage.

This isn't my issue and the only reason I brought it up is because a MVL member that wishes to remain nameless requested that I do so and so I did and so I also did my best to represent his viewpoint. But all in all I am really not all that vested in this discussion and frankly believe that this issue hasn't been worth all the effort that's been expended on it.

I really would like to hear what Cari has to say on the subject, less because of it's impact on the MVL than on the effect on the metaverse in general. She did wish to give it thought before rendering an opinion and I for one will echo whatever opinion she gives. And that is all I have to say on this issue as far as my personal preferences lay.
Reply #307 Top
My personal interpretation of Cari's statement was that she thought there was little advantage to using a ARC. Now if she were to decide otherwise and release an update that rectifies the situation, unless i am missing something here, it solves nothing.

All players would need do is not update. Now i'll say this now before we come to it but i will not update DA again. Ever. I have a very stable version that Cari herself sent me, i'm not sure if it has a equivilant on SDC but a quick look at my profile will see i have a different 1.8g build than most. I have no pathfinder issues no fleet bugs, no error 12's.

I have what i would call for me anyway, a perfect DA.

Just thought i would state that now before we come to that bridge, if it happens, so no one is of the believe that i refuse to update so i could continue using the ARC's.

But as for other players, we cannot force them to update to elimante the use of ARC's so even though we should listen to Cari's opinion and give it great thought, the MVL should br prepared to come up with a ruling one way or another that does not realy on updating.

If we were to ban these games, then i think the honor system, whish has been working well for us so far, should be in place to render these games illegal.

Personally i like ARC's, they allow you to play each race with a different strategy than you normally could. And we have not mentioned that you can possibly make stronger opponents then you normally could. I played a game against a race i have made that is based on the Krynn but with the Super hive ability. What a pain they were to deal with. Even though in that game i was using an ARC it was some time till i was able to deal with that Krynn/Hive race.

Now i will not deny that in some cases you can improve a race by using an ARC. That being said i also have gone up in difficulty which easily offsets any possible advantage an ARC may bring.

So i offer this proposal, should players wish to use ARC's and there is a split on whether they should be allowed or not, we implement a rule that states anyone using a ARC must do so at a level above their playing medal.

The increase in difficulty and the resulting bonus's to the AI offset the ARC, or even negate it all together.
Reply #308 Top
What about players who only play at Suicidal?
Reply #309 Top
Touche. I guess if your good enough to play and beat the game at suicidal then any possible small advantage an ARC would give would be negligible. though it then does raise the question of what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Oh well, i never said it was a good idea!!!
;p :LOL:
Reply #310 Top
@Justin
Even though I don't play Suicidal myself, I couldn't have said it better. I mainly just stick to Tough-I'm honestly too scared to go to Suicidal.

@neilo
I would hope you'll update to 2.0 when it gets released, and possibly before then when the military/social production rounding error gets backported (come on, you know you want that extra 1 production you're supposed to have...), as well as some other bugs that the Stardock folks have fixed/will fix. (Have fixed applying more so to bugs present in all versions that are fixed in TA and will eventually hopefully be backported.)

@everyone
I'd love to have a ridiculously in depth discussion on ARC with all of you, but I'm not sure this is the appropriate place for it, or the best, even though the thread is discussing the issue as it pertains to the MVL.
Reply #311 Top
If we were to ban these games, then i think the honor system, whish has been working well for us so far, should be in place to render these games illegal.

The honor system has served us well in the past, no reason to assume it wouldn't work for this.

As far as being forced to update, given I'm still on DL v1.4x I would certainly hope there is no onus associated in being slow to move to the newest update.

The most likely event is Cari responds with the opinion that this is no big deal, in which case all objection either fades away entirely or drops certainly below the level of any kind of change being approved.
Reply #312 Top
Actually, this is the appropriate forum to discuss ARC and how it applies to the MVL.

No, obviously using ARC will not adversely affect your health, nor are they "illegal" (though that is exactly why we are discussing this, I thought). How it compares to steroid use is that some players -- including, notably, myself -- were not even aware that this could be done, while other players have apparently been doing it all along, even though the legality was never discussed (well, not until now). I was under the impression that the purpose of the metaverse, and certainly the MVL, was to create a more level playing field for meaningful competition. Perhaps the comparison to steroid-cheating isn't all that correct; frankly, I could care less about sports, so I'll admit that I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

Now, there's certainly nothing stopping me from using ARC myself; I'm sure I could figure it out, as could anyone here. But I really shouldn't need to do this, just to keep up with people who like fiddling with mods. That just seems very wrong to me, and I'm a bit surprised to find myself isolated in this opinion.

I won't stand in the way if people think this should be allowed in the MVL, but I don't think I will be using it myself. And I really hope that Cari disallows this for MV games in general, since it seems to be, at the least, contrary to the intention of the metaverse.

(Note that I would not be opposed to adding more racial customization options the "legal" way. It's just fiddling with config files that bothers me.)
Reply #313 Top
Hi!
ARC is only a slight advantage at most

I need to chime in on that topic.

Yesternight ;) I ran a suicidal testbed with proposed game settings for 7th round, edited my race to evil SuperBreeder Altarians, and made all four AIs "straw man" (korx AI, super trader, lowest settings, points for range, repair...). Ran the test for about one game year just sitting on my iconian HW. At the end of it NOT A SINGLE AI had even one ship with weapons, or a single trade freighter. I had normal to friendly relations with all of them.

That suicidal game was simply not suicidal at all! But there's a catch in this: if I'd play it properly (get rid of most AIs in the first game year - doable with precursor library on my HW and Super Breeder big pop output, and devoting second game year to making money for the tech victory) and would submit its results, I'd get points for SUICIDAL 1-game-year victory! Since there already are some games with 1-year victory, with my settings I'd likely beat most of them and get my team an easy point for high-scoring fastest game.

Now compare that to Wyndstar's numerous attempts to achieve his 1-year victory. I'm very certain he's using stock races, because he simply does not know he can use ARC and straw man opponents.

Fair play?

Now, when this knowledge is public and anyone can use it, it is. If someone decides to handicap him by not using that knowledge, is that his decision.

Reading all this again, I reconsidered my opinion. I simply don't want to handicap myself and my team every round by using stock races. Now I vote for "allow whatever MW allows".

BR, Iztok

Reply #314 Top
Iztok, my point excactly, handicapping the AI is ridiculous. May as well go fishing using dynomite.
Reply #315 Top
@Iztok...you lowered the AI settings and it kept you at Suicidal for the difficulty level? Usually changing the AI behavior to anything easier (other than Personality and Abilities) will lower the overall difficulty level (to at least Obscene).

Also...I'd also like to point out that Iztok gave them the Korx NOT Generic AI behavior set, and he did give them a SA and he did give them abilities (maybe not necc. good ones, but they did get some, and on Suicidal the AI gets extra bonuses anyhow). And yet in his particular game, they still didn't do much. Now is it really the fault of how he set them up?

I had a Gigantic game that I had made 9 custom races for using the stock Custom Race template. In many ways they were a reworking of the nine stock races because I coupled what seemed to me appropriate abilities with the Super Ability. And in the end, it still came down to two or three major AI; the Torian/Breeder personality, the Drengin/Dominator, and the Altarian/Organizer (because they would continue to expand while everyone fought the proxy war on their behalf).

The AI in GCII is pretty good, and it gives you a good challenge, but its not exactly a big secret that some of the races are just stronger and better designed than others. We know that the Drengin AI has had a LOT of work put into it, making them a consistently good opponent.

My point is, even the stock races can give you the shooting fish in a barrel syndrome sometimes depending on who you use.

I am surprised that Iztok's AI didn't do much; I've used custom, but not necc. straw dog, opponents, some of whom are not always quite as strong as the Stock Races and I've managed to get my butt kicked quite handidly, but I have seen instances where one or two seem to take their sweet time before working on their military. I've learned two things seem to be pretty constant, once one race gets a military started, they all do. And secondly, the AI loves to conquer Minor Races, if there's one in their backyard they seem to militarize faster.
Reply #316 Top
I'm surprised as well. In the past, when I've used straw dogs, that was not my experience.

BTW, I used Altarians vs. Arceans, Torians, Humans, and Krynn in round 7. I won't be using ARC or straw dogs for any further rounds either.
Reply #317 Top
just wanted to share some of the discussion going on over at the Tyranny of Evilforums (which are awesome and y'all just be visiting)


DethAdder: Since the only place on here that what Cari said about ARC was mentioned was a place I can't post I'll bring it in here.

At first I was thinking ok, I'll go with whatever she says since she is the Meta maintainer. After thinking about it though, If shes goes through the process of making this illegal and coding it in and all while letting Spacetimer and those obvious cheated games stay in the top ten I'll be pissed as any metaverse player should be. You have a small tweak that they'll take the time to squash, while blatant cheat games are allowed to stay.

If that's the route they want to take then I'll figure out what Spacetimer did one way or the other and just start putting some ridiculous games in. That's the message they will be sending. His games are legal while our tweak is not. **** that! I may just resign out of principle.

Motti: I wasn't even aware that you could change the enemy's .xml file. I'm still not completely clear on that, but don't have much interest in it either. I don't think it's even possible in DL though.

It would make the game pretty boring. I would think that if people used this method, they'd get bored and leave soon enough. Not before they caused a lot of damage to the rest of the MVL though.

Maybe Cari and others at SD can change the code on the server side to cheat flag games with custom AIs. I'm not sure if that's even feasible.

Silverbeacher: I agree with you DA; and to be honest I kinda wish the whole thing would just go away at this point.

@Motti: One could alter the AI customracexml the same way you do for the ARC but as Dystopic says, you can do ALL of it right in the Edit Opponent screen anyhow so why bother with a text editor? And he's right, they would have to ban even stock custom races altogether, and that's just not possible. Read my explanation that follows on the why.

So let me explain, again, how and what these things are (ARC and Straw Dog) and how they are achieved,

ARC can only be done through editing the customracexml. It is because of this outside editing not directly available in the game, that some are arguing that it should be illegal. In truth, a valid argument. I don't personally agree, but I also have always thought SD should have more customization in its races anyhow.

Straw Dog Opponents are done directly in the setup screen. This means that they are perfectly legal and legit race creations. The fact that the AI is not able to compete with the player is actually more a fault of bad AI planning (specifically less time by the developers into certain AI personality routines (iconian for example) than the player being at fault. There is no way to ban straw dogs in the MV, as invalidating them would invalidate the use of any and all custom races. Likewise, some of the stock races are inherently weak and are in many ways even weaker than the Straw Dogs (again the Iconians come to mind). If we really wanted everyone to be at full capability with opponents I would have to dictate that the only use Drengin, Torian, Yor, Terran, and Altarian. (and Krynn and Korath in DA); with Aggression levels raised to 100, and Abilities and Economic sliders at maximum. (Basically, the opposite direction) and would make everyone play at Suicidal.


I guess its just that a lot people to me seem to be missing the big picture and thats the game has its flaws and we're not playing a Tourney game where its exactly the same down to the wire. People call for one thing but they are not thinking what the consequences of those actions will be.

For ARC users, this means that scores that in most cases are at best only comparable to 'normal' MV games will be cheat flagged while like DA said, blatant cheat games sit there at the top of the heap.

For the straw dog opponents, there is no way to stop them from being in the game because it would invalidate all custom races, and quite simply, some of the AIs just plain suck. Its a known fact, get over it.
Reply #318 Top
just wanted to share some of the discussion going on over at the Tyranny of Evilforums (which are awesome and y'all just be visiting)

I missed this, which thread is it?

You know I wasn't even aware that "straw dog" opponents was something achievable within the game and merely assumed that it was only achieveable via the same editing as ARC.

This seems to be getting more complex and confusing the further we go. The more I know the less I understand.

I do want to go back and repeat something that I said earlier I feel is important.

If the only point of the MVL were simply who wins and who loses then I would be more concerned about stuff like this. However the actual winning and losing and associated "bragging rights" are far down the list of reasons to play the MVL.

I think the idea that playing MVL games is simply fun should be the prime motivation and if ARC adds to someones fun then I see no harm in the practice even if it may make the player appear to be a bit better than they actually are.

Secondly the idea of playing in the MVL is a way for everyone to improve their game. Certainly the "regular" players gain valuable experience from being on teams with so-called "experts" if a modded ARC allows a "regular" player to occassionally beat an "expert" I would expect that expert to take the defeat good naturedly. The more people learn the more they enjoy the game and I do believe that virtually everyone in the MVL has improved their game and that goes for the so called "experts" as well. Everyone has gained from the league.

Thirdly the camaraderie that develops among teammates and opponents alike. Only after all of these other things would I place the importance of actually winning or losing. So if someone takes some minor liberty that lets someone that I feel is not as good a player as I am beat me, I don't feel bad about that at all. My feelings of self worth do not hinge on any requirement that I must win any competition that I enter and the value of the MVL is far greater than merely who wins and who loses.


Yes scores and who wins and who loses are important but in my book they're about 4th on the list of importance. I would really hate to see the league torn apart by something like this.

With that said I wouldn't want to have something like the ctrl-n bug where you select suicidal but after enough ctrl-n's the AI's turn into cakewalk and do nothing but drool and the game still gets reported as suicidal. I think every one would agree that this isn't right. The difficulty levels are an important guage as to how your own game is advancing, suicidal AI's that don't colonize or build military ships are *not* suicidal AI's and to me it doesn't matter how they happened to come to be. A persons difficulty level should be representative of the actual difficulty.

This is why I have far less issue with someone "tweaking" their own race than I do have with the idea of dumbing down the AI. Yes I understand that the Iconians are not the same opponent as the Torian or Drengin but at suicidal they still colonize as aggressively and build ships as aggressively as any other race. Yes they're not as good as some other AI's but they still deserve to be called suicidal. But for an opponent to be called suicidal and do nothing but drool is just wrong and I don't care if this is somehow "legitimately" achieved in-game or achieved by ARC. I would view both of these equally wrong and deserving of being banned persuant to our honor system.
Reply #319 Top
Basically a couple of posts back I had mention that I wasn't particularly invested in the topic and didn't really care that much which way the decision went. However I find that's really not quite the case.

The other point is that as far as ARC or the in-game dumbing down of opponents I'm not so much concerned about how it was accomplished but more concerned in what was accomplished.

Basically I think we may have been chasing the wrong result. Instead of worrying about ARC and "straw man" opponents I think it may be more productive to focus on result.

And the result that people are actually concerned about is that when someone submits a game that's posted as suicidal people have a certain knowledge and expectation about the caliber of the opponent. I don't think anyone needs to be told how the AI plays at their usual level. People playing at tough know full well the caliber of opponent that they expect and it's the same at every other level.

I don't care if someone uses ARC. I don't care if some uses in-game adjustment of their opponents. What I do care about is that when someone submits a game at suicidal that it accurately represents the suicidal difficulty level. Same with every other level.

So instead of worrying about ARC and any form of opponent adjustment which could as easily be for the good as for the bad, I propose we have the following rule, which is clearly enforceable only by the honor system.

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.


That's it. Simple and direct with the desired result but without going into all the possible methods by which a games effective difficulty could be less than reported.

What do people think about this proposal?
Reply #320 Top
That's it. Simple and direct with the desired result but without going into all the possible methods by which a games effective difficulty could be less than reported.

What do people think about this proposal?


Well, it's kinda of subjective, but it's probably the best we can do, short of mandating race and opponents.

Reply #321 Top
Well, it's kinda of subjective, but it's probably the best we can do, short of mandating race and opponents.

Yes, it is subjective.

But the point is that this is the real concern, that a posted difficulty represents reality. There is no way to ensure this just as there is no way we can ensure that someone doesn't select abundant planets when the settings call for rare. But I believe in the common sense and honor of the league because without both the league has no future.

Actually there is a way to ensure that people play the same game without counting on the honor system and that is to have a single game saved at turn 1 that everyone plays. But that isn't the MVL. There are leagues like that but I think that would kill this league and spoil a lot of fun. If your only point is score and in defining who is the better player than perhaps this is the best way, but I think the MVL has more going for it than that.

Plus the abilty to make the decision that the current round's criteria are best suited by choosing the Yor with the Technologist's party versus choosing the Drath and the Federalists is a big part of the game. This would all go away if everyone played the exact identical game. I think most of the fun in the league would go away with it if we used this method.
Reply #322 Top
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.


I like it, simple and effective. I think this issue has become very complex and has even gotten to the point where we are talking about possible widespread MV changes, which don't just affect us as a League but everyone in the MV, which to me, us dictating policy for the entire MV is not right or our place.

As for where in the ToE forum, check the League Tavern in the Lounge.
Reply #323 Top
gotten to the point where we are talking about possible widespread MV changes, which don't just affect us as a League but everyone in the MV, which to me, us dictating policy for the entire MV is not right or our place.


Yes, I defintely agree. A couple dozen MVL player's opinions shouldnt change something for the entire rest of the MV community.

Kzinti empire2.JPG Sentient species taste better...

Reply #324 Top
As for where in the ToE forum, check the League Tavern in the Lounge.

Thanks :)

I think this issue has become very complex and has even gotten to the point where we are talking about possible widespread MV changes, which don't just affect us as a League but everyone in the MV, which to me, us dictating policy for the entire MV is not right or our place.

Yes, I defintely agree. A couple dozen MVL player's opinions shouldnt change something for the entire rest of the MV community.

I have to say that it would be a big mistake to flatter ourselves with the presumption that this is the case.

I can guarantee you that if any changes occur in the MV it will be only because Cari was apparently unaware of ADC and now she is.

Saying that our little discussions will have the slightest effect of "dictating policy for the entire MV" is ludicrous.

Stardock and Cari will do whatever they feel is right to do and will not be guided by our little discussion. In fact the assumption that either Cari or Stardock is aware of the discussion in this thread or if aware cares in the slightest about our opinions is again very presumptive.

We have every right to discuss this and decide how it’s to be treated within the MVL. But I’m pretty sure Stardock isn’t waiting to see what we come up with as a solution in the MVL so that they can do the same thing for the MV as a whole.
Reply #325 Top
I have to say that it would be a big mistake to flatter ourselves with the presumption that this is the case.


This is what I meant too, though I worded it inelegantly. ;)

Kzinti empire2.JPG Sentient species taste better...