[HS] Ancient Conquest Grand Hotseat [--- ILLYRIA AVAILABLE ---updated 1st october ---]

[Mithridate]

Im not saying my reasoning is necessarily right, im just trying to sort out how you reason what should and should not be allowed as well as what is and is not a bugg and/or exploit.

[Samar]

I didn't disband the 3 man unit because in the other hotseats I play we don't allow this move so I didn't think about it. The ship was there because if it weren't and I was to lose a battle, my army would not retreat as it was on foreign lands with no allied regions around. :/

[Samar]

"Its just a shame people have to spend time worrying about how people are going to exploit game mechanics and how to best avoid it. Personally I tend to lean towards honest play rather than doing whatever I possibly can to squeak out a win." - Macrath

I agree 100%!
Let's wait for Vipman to give out a ruling

[Makakula]

"Its just a shame people have to spend time worrying about how people are going to exploit game mechanics and how to best avoid it. Personally I tend to lean towards honest play rather than doing whatever I possibly can to squeak out a win." - Macrath

I agree 100%!
Let's wait for Vipman to give out a ruling

Even if this thing will be considered as a bug and forbidden in future (I don't recommend doing this because it can cause to problems I was talking about in previous message) I've used it when it wasn't forbidden.
Also that's your fault that you have left your units in such a vulnerable position.

[Mithridate]

I would still like to know your reasoning Makakula, can you explain it and how this is different from the various obvious exploits I listed?

[Makakula]

I would still like to know your reasoning Makakula, can you explain it and how this is different from the various obvious exploits I listed?

I don't count as bug all the ''exploits'' you listed, lifting siege after general was stolen is completely realistic for me. Also I've never counted as a bug agent stomping (still I don't use it as it's not allowed).

Well, first of all, this thing is not forbidden, while things you listed, f.e. movement bugs, are.
Then, while you can't prevent something like movement bug , being defeated like his could be foreseen, that was enough just to disband these 3 units. So it's under defeated player responsibility.
Also, I couldn't win a battle even in this way if I attacked with weak forces, I needed at least 4:5 odds or something like this. So this can be counted as a simple retreat.

I've found out this thing when it was used against me. But it haven't crossed in my mind that I could protest, I decided that it was my fault.

P.S: I don't think you are the one who should talk about honest playing after you have subbed Venice in OKTR... Well, in very strange way.

[Mithridate]

Warning, wall of text - read at your own risk with the knowledge I do not mean to make "drama" or pick a fight. Don't read or reply unless you can tolerate "polite" discussion.

Also I've never counted as a bug agent stomping (still I don't use it as it's not allowed).
Well, first of all, this thing is not forbidden, while things you listed, f.e. movement bugs, are.

Exploits are forbidden, those were examples of exploits.

You have still not explained your reasoning but yet again state your opinion.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Agent stomping is exploiting because: When the agent has nowhere to go, it dies. This is an intended mechanic to prevent multiple agents on the same square ( preventing stacked merchants in theory ), but you trigger it by creating a situation for which the intended function does not work ( you take away all possible squares to move upon ). Therefore it is an exploit, as it exploits an unintended weakness in the engine.

Movement bugs are also unintended weaknesses in the engine only clearer, there is not even an underlying intended function but pure buggs being exploited.
Recruitment bugg is an intended function of returning untrained unit to the pool being exploited, by swapping it between units creating unlimited men as the game does not recognize it being done. Exploiting intended functions in unintended way. Siege bug same thing, siege is tied to the action and not the thing being besieged and can be exploited.

So my reasoning is to ration out what is intended and what is not in the game, then if it is used in the way it is intended or not. Lastly I may add if i think it should be allowed or not on the sake of fun and fairness. Please explain how you reason as I still do not understand.

This is both unintended and used in a way that was not intended as far as I am concerned, I can explain why if you wish.


I know two allowed exploits on the fly, joining a cata to a besieging army to assault when cata itself would not reach ( i think it an exploit, though it may well be intended ) and exploiting the stupidity of the BAI since it cannot really be prevented. Some extreme cases should be, but where to draw the line?

P.S: I don't think you are the one who should talk about honest playing after you have subbed Venice in OKTR... Well, in very strange way.

For the last time, I did as I was instructed by the subber and the admin, not to mention the former player. It was neither strange or unfair.

Not that I am discussing "fair" even though you seem aware what I think, I want to know your reasoning behind what looks to be a partial decision on your part.

I still think I got a fair result, so I won't continue participating in this hotseat if I'll be forced to replay, put Carthage in the list of available factions. Army was not defeated, it retreated. And as I said, that's not my fault that Samar didn't protect his units.
If you want to ban something, then you should add this to the rules first. Even if you want to add this strange rule, I've defeated syracusian army before it gonna be added, so all my actions were allowed.

Exploits are not allowed ( nor buggs, tho that is not spelled out ). It is unreasonable to have all exploits written down, we'd have an entire page of them to read through and even today we still discover new ones. Therefore we think all exploits forbidden unless otherwise agreed by default, rather than the backwards way around.

It was a defeat as Vipman points out, Vipman explains his reasoning and you have yet to provide reasoning but "I think so" imo.

[Vipman]

Firstly, it's not realism that decides here what's allowed and not, it's about fairness, this is a game with limitations and errors that we're trying to balance as much as possible. Also ultimately it's up to the majority of the players about what's considered a bug or not and what rules they want to change.

I was hesitant because I thought I remembered that I allowed this once in the past, but I searched for it now and it was a fake impression after all, I said it's not fair to defeat an army without actually defeating it. It is a bug in the autoresolve in this mod unfortunately, I do not remember seeing it any other time.

Therefore I can only maintain the same position, it can be added as a new rule if necessary to ban the "reinforcing army bug" or "It's not allowed to defeat a near equal or bigger army without it taking casualties", at least 10% maybe.

Makakula if there were such cases before, then please point it out and I will take proper measures. Please replay your turn without getting a result like this.

I'll be gone until tomorrow at least and won't be around here to see what's going on.

[Makakula]

Firstly, it's not realism that decides here what's allowed and not, it's about fairness, this is a game with limitations and errors that we're trying to balance as much as possible. Also ultimately it's up to the majority of the players about what's considered a bug or not and what rules they want to change.

I was hesitant because I thought I remembered that I allowed this once in the past, but I searched for it now and it was a fake impression after all, I said it's not fair to defeat an army without actually defeating it. It is a bug in the autoresolve in this mod unfortunately, I do not remember seeing it any other time.

Therefore I can only maintain the same position, it can be added as a new rule if necessary to ban the "reinforcing army bug" or "It's not allowed to defeat a near equal or bigger army without it taking casualties", at least 10% maybe.

Makakula if there were such cases before, then please point it out and I will take proper measures. Please replay your turn without getting a result like this.

I'll be gone until tomorrow at least and won't be around here to see what's going on.

I still think I got a fair result, so I won't continue participating in this hotseat if I'll be forced to replay, put Carthage in the list of available factions. Army was not defeated, it retreated. And as I said, that's not my fault that Samar didn't protect his units.
If you want to ban something, then you should add this to the rules first. Even if you want to add this strange rule, I've defeated syracusian army before it gonna be added, so all my actions were allowed.

[Dr Mac]

Woooow, what a week wasted Tut tut though I must say!

[Vipman]

You're trying to imagine reality with all sorts of possibilities in a game of 0 and 1's. The army did not retreat, you're just imagining it retreated, it was not Samar which decided his army to retreat, the players have no choice here, this is just stupid. It wasn't a retreat at all, it was defeated, it says there "Victory", got through a bug of the autoresolve.

The fact that the defeated army retreats and can't move 1 turn is an unfair disadvantage because the army was defeated according to bugged game mechanics, but de facto it didn't lose even 1 man therefore it didn't actually participate in the battle and was falsely defeated. This becomes an exploit of the game mechanics, if the player would be able to choose if and where to retreat his army, then it could be allowed, but the player has no choice, therefore everyone has the right to be defeated in fair battle and can't be taken because of the game which decides stupid retreats in place of the player.

Getting a bigger force to reinforce a small one, obtaining an easy victory is one thing. Being defeated without losing 1 man is not a fair victory. You have to defeat it with the army taking casualties, to prove the army participated in the battle and wasn't excluded because of an autoresolve bug. If you choose to leave, very well then.

[english RAF commander]

24 hours long gone, could some1 sub him
Thanks

[tavix]

24 hours long gone, could some1 sub him
Thanks

The debate about the validation of that battle is still on that means this is on hold atm.

[Vipman]

The debate about the validation of that battle is still on that means this is on hold atm.

I thought I clearly said my decision is final and Carthage turn must be replayed. If Makakula does not replay the turn, Mithridate will take over Carthage as he expressed his will to join, for which we should be thankful.

[Mithridate]

I will take over Chartage if this cannot be resolved "peacefully".

[Macrath]

Aye +rep to Mith for keeping this goin

[Mithridate]

Had to replay the bloody turn after accidentally saving a heroic vic, is it just me or are naval AR especially prone to those in this mod? I will create another hotseat or two with this mod asap... I adore it already, think it potentially great for hotseating too so it could be awesome. A shame I am in too many Anyhow, Mac should recognize this:


No longer blinded, no longer deaf. Carthage is remade in the image of the moon, embracing our heritage we name ourselves The Crescent! Under this new name we bring retribution, fitting that one named after the stars be put down in accordance with such hubris. Orion is no more, nor any of those that followed him to our shores.

Am I so wrong to wish that they
Would see things like I do?
And am I so wrong to think
That they might love me too?
Why shouldn't they adore me?
Is it not within my right?
I'll not be overshadowed!
Mine is not the lesser light!
I've waited long enough now
For them all to come around
And though the Sun may plead and threaten,
The Moon will stand her ground

Peace is offered to Syracuse, with this offer comes our mercy of not slaughtering your leader but merely the army besieging us. Leave our shores knowing that nothing but death await you here, that you leave only by our leave. Several ships have been sunk and an army decimated and drowned as a divine sacrifice.

We are death

[Samar]

Glad to have you onboard Even if that means the demise of my beloved Orion

[Nonorios]

Ha! loser syracuse about to get rekked

[Mithridate]

With superior forces, superior economy and diplomatic assets - I'd not presume Victory against him, especially not when he is at my very doorstep.

I am confident I will not lose, that I will hold... But at what cost, and winning? It is not good enough for me.