Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I am trying to get a list of house rules for MP games, with things that should be banned [like Sickle farming, suiciding mages with Ankh etc], of course for game admins to decide it's usage.

So the question is - do you consider trading commanders via Charm as an exploit that spoils the game?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Most definetly not. It's not only impossible to enforce such a rule, but it also implies that diplomacy and trading are not allowed in general. How does ond enforce this rule. Are no commanders allowed to be in provinces by themselves at all ever? Is the charm spell to be banned?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

No, I don't think it's an exploit. If you want to go through that much effort and coordination to pick up a commander from another player, go for it. Commanders are just another form of resource.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I'd also say that the other things you list: Sickle farming and Ankh suicide aren't commonly considered exploits.

If you were planning on a game where many common borderline cases were banned, trading commanders might fit.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Suiciding mages with the ankh sounds pretty hard to enforce too. How do you tell if it's planned or just a regular fight? Sickle farming is much easier to spot. At least that's how it looks to me.

I don't think trading commanders with charm or enslave should be banned. Like rdonj said it's a big pain to do and the gain is not unbalanced. Each trades a commander. Not like sickle farming which is basically free death gems.

I only just discovered the anhk trick and I've been using that idea during regular fights. If I lose a few mages during a castle assault that's not an exploit. It's just sensible use of an artifact.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Ive often suggested that there should be a list of standardized rules for MP games. Too many arguments break out where the gist of it is something along the lines of "everyone knows" when obviously everyone doesnt know or agree.

However I have also added that there will never, and should never, be just one. There should be a number of them. One single collection point for such rules would really help. Threads could refer to "and everything on Rule Set #4" and link to that site or thread. It would also help people who are starting games to remember items that they did want to ban from their game. Or at least cut way down on some of the pre-game conversations by being able to say "I browsed the rules list and considered everything some people ban".

To answer the initial question: No I dont think its an exploit. In fact its one of my favorite things to do. But I can see where it might be considered unfair in duels and such where the winner is expected to win based just on their own strategies without help from others.

Oh and added note: it IS possible to enforce such rules. If the game has logging switch turned on then the log file makes it fairly obvious. All the game admin has to do is setup an automated search for the things they have banned and check the hosting log each turn.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

outside of conspiring with another player, I don't think either of those are exploits. If you go to _genuine_ battle with another player and have the Ankh and purposefully cast a spell to suicide your mages, so what? Any spell will probably be battlefield wide and something to which undead are immune (like Foul Vapors); as such is it simply a viable strategy for winning a battle too.

I in fact recall one GLORIOUS battle between me as LA Agartha and another player who was LA Pyth. Pyth was attacking me with overwhelming forces of Hydras, Elemental Royalty, and summoned creatures. I knew that Foul Vapors would also be cast. I took all the mages and troops I had into battle, and cast Life After Death, Heat from Hell, and Rigor Mortis. The reincarnated troops meant the Hydras had to mow twice as long (giving more time for fatigue to wear at them). The LAD also protected the mages, simply turning them into undeads as they fell to Foul Vapors and fatigue. In the end, all my troops died and almost all my mages fled, but two or three were passed out from fatigue and say stayed on the field. Fortunately, by that time every Hydra, mage, elemental, and summoned creature of Pyth's were also passed out, so the two sides just sat there, approaching death from fatigue. I literally had three soulless mages facing down an armada of Hydras and Elemental Royalty! Pyth autorouted. However, I had flown in an SC to the province they moved from (knowing this all would happen), that province was taken and so in the autorout, they all autodied. After the battle, all those mages remained as soulless mages (I had about 15 of them or something).

So, was that an exploit? or just a winning strategy?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I wouldn't consider it an exploit. It is merely a different kind of trading after all.

The ankh thing, now when I have some experience with it, I would definitively consider an exploit. Maerlande and Ink, the ankh trick is not about saving your commanders, but about cheaply raising tons of undead. OTOH, Lanka, for example, once the research is done, can do the same with regular commanders, so against them maybe it's justified. I would like to see the ability removed from demons.

The sickle farming was not such a big deal with gem gens. Without them I think it should be banned from games.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@Ink - It would be pretty damn hard to argue that properly using a spell is considered an exploit :P

@Gandalf - I don't think I'd trade mages with someone in a duel. Actually I don't think anyone would, what's the gain in trading with the only other player on the map? Your definition of duel is a bit odd ;). I'm sure that in a RAND game that would be considered cheating, but I don't think there's any other game type where that would be considered an exploit.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Nah, commander trading isn't an exploit. Of course if the game is no diplo then it's against the rules.

I think sickle farming is probably an exploit, but it doesn't seem very degenerate. It could be that someone is able to do something really ridiculous with it, but no-one has so far to my knowledge.

Giving your commanders to another player (rather than trading) is also not an exploit, but could well be a total douche move if you're doing it to throw the game, or because of something someone did outside the game.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Yes, I am going to make a list of things considered exploits, so game admins can just include them in their games. There were some discussion about it already and certainly Sickle farming and suiciding mages on purpose via Life after Death will surely be on the list.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

lab filling
Bogarus orders (except on bogarus type, old units)
chayot RoW
chayot RoR

are exploits to my mind.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I think you mean Bogus. The clue is in the name.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@Psycho

Yes, that's why I was talking about using it in a real fight. Rather than throwing priests at big PD to kill them off or something.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Beginner questions: what is Sickle Farming and Ankh suicide?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

hmm, not an exploit but reminds me of a wily vet trick that is discouraging to learn about halfway through the game

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I'm still not sure how you can hold suiciding mages in a battle with an opponent while you have LAD up can be an exploit. Is using the Sickle in a battle with an opponent an exploit too?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

You suicide your mages against remotes, indie attacks, an ally, etc. And you create upkeep free mages and undead reanimators out of priests to create endless chaff.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Wouldnt that be a tactic? The response would be the same as late Ermor?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Meh, my views are well known on this, but how about...

Exploiting archer screens?
Exploiting switching the Armor of Virtue to somebody else after the returning has stuck?
Exploiting using a death bless on mages (including ritual spells)?
Exploiting sneak, attack, sneak, attack to avoid almost any retaliation?
Exploiting (potentially) blocking enemy movement by moving a large chaff force into them?
Exploiting moving a smallish force in on the magic phase to get your opponent to burn through gems before the main event in the movement phase?
Exploiting globals going into effect the round they go up?
Exploiting sticking cursed items on suicide commanders to get the enemy to pick them up?
Exploiting IRC all day to gain a big diplomatic advantage?
Exploiting casting spells in combat to take advantage of the deterministic order they go off in a round (reverse communions, etc.)?
Exploiting casting ritual spells to take advantage of the semi-deterministic order they go off?
Exploiting pooling gems for a mutually beneficial global? Dispels?
Deliberately trying to make the target route in an assassination?
Using vengeance of the dead to auto route targets after 50 turns?
Donating gems/items to an ally on your defeat?
Donating gems/items to the guy fighting your next target?
Using scorched earth and metagaming to get a leg up in the next game?
Exploiting autosummoned units (maenads, slaves, etc.) to make your forts practically unstormable?

I could go on. Seems like an exercise in both futility and likely to end in bad blood to try and dictate all the things that "gentlemen" are not supposed to do in war. If it doesn't break the game (and in fact everything discussed in this thread are examples of the quirks that make this game) I think it does far more harm than good to try and claim tactics available in the game are invalid.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Heehee. Great list.

Altho, admittedly that IS a list of the type of items that some people do take offense to.
I have no problem with the idea that the person who is creating the game might list any or all of those as not-allowed as long as its done clearly and publicly before people join the game so people can agree and join, or not.
Which is kindof the purpose here.

(on the other hand if someone wanted to ban them all then I would again suggest a perfectly balanced contest where exactly duplicated nations are used)

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@ Zeldor: right if you are doing stuff like attacking your ally to suicide your mages, that's one thing, but using LAD in a battle against an opponent (even you do so with hopes of getting some undead mage-priest reanimators) is another.

@ Baalz: Could you explain the "sneak, attack, sneak, attack to avoid almost any retaliation?" exploit?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

One of my favorite tactics. Nations which have full armies of stealth ability (leader, infantry, archer, mage, priest, possibly mounted) doing guerilla tactics. Sneak behind front lines, take a province, sneak out, move two or three provinces before attacking again. Buy PD there, recruit units, drive taxes to 200. Force the enemy to buy heavily into PD or maintain large armies farther behind his lines than he had planned to. Particularly useful when combined with an ally who is doing the standard action such as marching a large army toward them.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

If you sneak away from a province you won't be hit by any rituals or teleporting thugs except for Mind Hunt. At least that's how I've heard it.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

This is sort of fundamental to how game logic currently works, and arguably just how combat works. I don't consider it an exploit.

Definitely an exploit. Item effects should end when the item is removed.

Uh, what? That's just how death bless works? Is it an exploit to use shrouds + N4 bless to stop diseased commanders from dying?

That's how sneak works... There are plenty of forms of retaliation that still work (eg, mindhunt, earth attack).

I'm not sure I can consider that an exploit. Its just part of the existing game logic and arguably WAD.

Seemingly WAD. No way to really enforce since there are other reasons to send a force in the magic phase.

I'm not even sure what this means. Globals just work the turn they go up. You can't change that - how can you exploit it?

Agree that its an exploit.

Lol what? Diplomatic rewards are usually commensurate with diplomatic effort - that's true whether you spend all day on IRC or sending PMs... IRC is just less annoying.

Not an exploit, its interesting strategically and WAD. Consider horror mark and call horror? How else would you have it work? Predictable spell-casting order is a feature, not an exploit.

Well, its 50% top down or bottom up the unit ID list, so I'm not sure how exactly you exploit this unless you feel like wasting gems to cast something twice to ensure a third spell happens after one of them?

How is this an exploit? Its a basic part of diplomacy.

I imagine its WAD, especially since there's one assassin who seems to be designed to do just that. (Mujina).

This is definitely a balancing feature. Don't kill so many units with your SC pretender already =p

Diplomatic advantage? not an exploit.

... Diplomacy? Also, payment for services rendered =)

What if you use scorched earth just to spite your killer?

No way to control this? Your pans make them whether you want them or not... Is also a valid way to build a defense force for if/when your walls are cracked.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

No, no, no, no of course not, that's the whole POINT of stealth, yes, yes, unavoidable so no, yes, no, no, no, no, no, your number is wrong and no since that's the only real niche the spell has, no, no, depends on the type of metagame, no.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Squirrel, I think thats exactly the point. LADing your priests is arguably WAD, as is sickle farming, etc.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I think that was the point. Some of these will be considered just part of the game. And others would be considered exploits. Its all a sliding scale of how much or how little it is. Where on the scale is your "cross the line" mark?

But, for a collection of different sets of "game rules" that people can point to we would first need a list of acceptable/not items that cover the full range from gentlemans game of fun to cutthroat no-holds-barred. This is one of the most complete lists Ive seen.

Before deliberating it, can we expand on it? Does anyone have any others that have ever been "declared uncool tactics that should not be allowed"? whether you agreed or not. Just the fact that it made someone whine is enough.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@Maerlande: It's not about the way you acquire the undead priests, it's about what you do with them afterwards. There's the other problem about not paying upkeep, but that's a significantly lesser issue than reanimating.

@Baazl: Nothing on that list is an exploit. Some things are examples of bad sportsmanship, but nothing else. Out of curiosity, are there actually any cursed items that you can exploit by suiciding commanders?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Lync ammies I know

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@Psycho - Sure, drop some guys with eyes of aiming in that cyclops' path, or black hearts for guys now sporting chest wounds. Of course, the gold standard is the slave collar, which seems to have no other purpose in the game...

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Eyes and Hearts and Collars won't be picked up by the enemy side.

Trum is right: Lychantropos' Amulet can be picked up by the enemy. But he probably won't care. If your enemy is using a buffing SC, it's going to have the misc slots filled. If it's just a pathless thug, well I'd be overjoyed to have a Bane snag one of those. If it's a mage in the backfield, unless he has flight then he'll probably survive the fight, at which point you can retire him from battle and use him to research/forge.

There's probably a few more items that you can do this with. Dimensional Rod, at least. Nothing that's worthwhile that I know of.

Edit: Doh! You don't have to worry about items during the fight of course, since they are picked up after the battle. You'd need an enemy mage to pick up the Lychantropos' Amulet in a failed assassination or magic battle or the arena in order to force the enemy mage to be wearing it in a fight.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Typically, sickles are used in farming. Therefore, Sickle farming seems to be WAD.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Hot discussion :)
I see games like "no Hinnom/Ashdod". Playing these nations becomes exploit as well.
I think the only real way to manage such "exploits" is through CBM author, or to make another CBM-like mod, is author of CMB is not active anymore, with several authors who can make chages to new vesions.
It is a big list of things that it would be nice to be changed in game balance, and I believe it would be a good idea if community could do it fast. through this mode, by simple voting of authors, for example. I don't think it's a big deal to create a mod which just changes some stats and some prices.

Or, better idea - to do additional mod, complimentary to CBM (though I don't know if it will work - if one mode can change something after it was changed by another mod).

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

problem being that none or nearly none of these "exploits" could be modded out even if it was warranted.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Ashdod is certainly still a balance problem, although CBM hit them with more nerf bat. Hinnom seems to have been dealt with for the most part.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

That's why I asked. The only thing that sounds like an exploit on that list cannot be done.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Armor of Virtue has an exploit, but it's not as described:

At the end of round 1 movement, all friendly units in the square the Armor of Virtue started in gets Ritual of Returning. (This also means that if you move in the very first turn instead of buff when wearing Virtue, Ritual of Returning doesn't stick to you.) But you could stick 6 MARKATA in that square on 'Hold','Attackx4'. And they will ALL get Ritual of Returning. :eek:

If that exploit doesn't scare the pants off you, you're probably just already not wearing pants.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

@Zeldor - this is probably a good deal too late to save this thread, but if the intent is to generate a list of frequently applied house rules in one place for convenience sake, it might have been politically expedient not to use the term "exploit" even if some of them do apply to practices some consider to be so.

SO, here is a list of commonly applied "house rules" and settings in no particular order that someone starting a new game might wish to consider, as a starting point:

Settings
1) Use 'X' mod(s)
2) Use 'Y' map
3) Modified Hall of Fame limit
4) Modified resource/gold/supplies/site frequency/research settings
5) Commander Renaming on
6) Score graphs disabled
7) Victory conditions other than default
8) Turn timing

House Rules
1) Ban diplomacy
2) Random nation assignment
3) Ban commander trading or selling (via mutually agreed upon charm/hellbind/etc. swaps)
4) Ban item/gem/gold/other trading
5) Ban "sickle farming"
6) Ban particular nation(s), (Ashdod, Hinnom, LA Ermor, LA R'yleh commonly)
7) Ban water nations
8) NAPs - disallowed
9) NAPs - all players bound by implied NAP for start X turns
10) Use of Bogus and Co.'s default scripts disallowed.
11) Use of Bogus and Co.'s default scripts only allowed for Bogus and Co. (no copying)
12) No "mass sharing" of Armor of Virtue just to apply Returning
13) No blood magic / blood hunting

I'm sure there are others, but I feel this might be more helpful than continuing to debate whether such-and-such practice is an "exploit" or not.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Some things are clearly exploits and there should be a list of things like that. Some tricks can also be spotted by vets and newer players may have no idea what's going on. Many people had nothing against gem gens because they have not faced real clamming.

And it brings another question - should wishing for Armageddon really exist? Or be allowed? It may be a good strat, but messes things so badly... and requires insane amounts of micro when preparing for it.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I think the game is most fun when you are a noob and playing with noobs. The more you learn about all the ways to get an edge, the more tainted you become. Its like the ring of power.

I know about a fair amount of stuff but would prefer to play with what I'd call casual players, the ones that are too lazy to take advantage of some of these things like coordinating to trade commanders or farm death gems. Gem generators are so inherently powerful I think they have to be removed. Even a casual player like me can't resist tons of off the charts gem income even with the micro-pain it can bring.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I agree with don. Big fan of the casual gaming. I'd be happier if no-one ever archer decoyed, for instance. As soon as one person does it, it kinda forces other people to though.

I also think if you need to specify a long list of rules you aren't playing with the right people. I prefer to just ask people not to be douchebags. Even with all the rules you can think of, there are certain people who are still going to try and weasel and rule-laywer and whine.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I agree. The game has too many MM intensive loose ends. I'm not saying I'm not doing them myself but I'd be much happier if the game was more streamlined and these MM heavy ways to make an extra buck were removed.
I personally can't resist the temptation so I end up working harder and spending more time on a mere game.

That said, some exploits are too much even for me - like Ankh priests reanamitors 4 example.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

WHAT IS THE "SNEAK ATTACK SNEAK ATTACK" EXPLOIT?!?!?!?!?!?!?

tell me now

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I think it has something to do with Markata, and how they are OP, especially with the sneaking. Did you ever think what would happen if you gave one a Black Heart? Especially since it is empowered in N? Heh? Hergnhhgh? That's right!

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

I think you're in the wrong thread with that.

I really want to know though. I once had a situation where I was almost certain that Pan had those unrest causing sneaking units in a couple of provinces of mine, but despite patrolling with _hundreds_ of soldiers for almost ten turns, I never found a thing.

Is this exploit something whereby sneaking units cannot be found? If that is so, I would certainly call it an exploit, especially for an unrest causing unit.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

As far as I know, no.
But Dryads are Stealth 25 and thus hard to find to start with.
Normally, leading stealth units subtracts from the commander's stealth, but Satyr Sneaks are Stealth 20(?) and thus don't.
Unrest also drops the chance of stealth units being found. If they were able to keep the unrest up high enough, your chances of finding them could be low, even with hundreds of patrollers.

Or, they could have not been there.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

In that case then: What is the "sneak attack sneak" exploit?

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

What it is is that if you have a commander that is doing as written, sneak one turn, attack next, then sneak, then attack again, etc, they are very very hard to catch. The only thing that will catch a sneaking commander is mind hunt, or happening to patrol in the province he is GOING to. I'm a little shaky on that last point, but it's as I understand it.

So teleporting thugs won't catch him, neither will seeking arrows, normal armies have no chance, I don't think remote assassination spells work either. It can be a pain.

Re: Trading commanders, exploit or not?
 

Couldn't you catch them if you were able to predict which province they had snuck to and were about to attack? Well you would have to move the troops in after they snuck to the province, but before they attacked.