Hi guys … Hey Llamabeast: I may not post often but I’ve been around since at least 2002. I first bought Shrapnel – Breakaway’s Austerlitz: Napoleon’s Greatest Victory and I bought Shrapnel - Malfador Machination’s SE IV as well. So I’ve seen a lot of board posts here as well as in beta boards for EQ, AC, and SWGs. So Foodstamp & Twan: I’m used to long quoting posts from us beta testers debating where the game should go; I hope you’ll keep indulging us. Aezeal – it’s enjoyment versus boredom and enjoyment is still winning and I’m still optimizing where I can. (Might someone have made something like a batch file mod to re-enter standard builds at the capital at least?)
On to at least one more clarification …
NT Jedi posted:
1)“And if changing the future via the save/reload was a legit fair action in single player games then why has this NEVER been documented as saying, "use the save/reload if your opponent has won a major battle"??”
2) “Considering all the games you own, how many of these games do you plan on providing the AI opponents the exact same save/reload advantage??”
3)“Using the save/reload after losing a major battle is an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE because the AI opponents do not have the option to use the save/reload. If the developers of any game expected gamers to use the save/reload to change the future then for a more balanced game they would have provided a secret method for AI opponents on harder difficulty levels. The developers would have also written documentation advising to use the save/reload to change already decided game results.” (end NT Jedi posts).
Hmm NT Jedi you seem to be saying everything a player can do the AI should be able to do: that to be “fair” we should have the same game capabilities. Unfortunately since the AI can’t think like a human player game builders rarely if ever make the player and AI equal. In fact usually there are several strong pluses for the AI so it’s strategic and tactical blunders don’t cause it to lose immediately. So the player and AI aren’t fairly balanced or ‘empowered’ to begin with. The developer also knows the strengths and weaknesses of their game rules and units so they can code an extreme familiarity with the game that the novice player doesn’t possess. Therefore since obviously the game is not designed with ‘identical’ abilities on each side it would be ‘unfair’ by design if you insist on equal/identical abilities for player and AI.
As for documentation: the save/reload is a known feature. Many players are quite aware of its use. It is rare for developers to document all possible uses of all their features. In fact one of Illwinter’s strengths is that they have that beautiful 300 page manual that many modern games don’t bother with. I still remember fondly the early Civilization and MOO manuals with lots of hints and advice. I don’t know if some developers haven’t mentioned using the save/reload feature and if I go by memory I think I can remember reading some mentioning its use. You certainly haven’t proven none have done it and I’m not going to reread a few dozen manuals and pdfs I’ve got around my computer to cite them.
On to talk about losing and defense:
NT Jedi posted:
1)”Unfortunately by using such an advantage during games you never learn to deal with important major losses, you never learn strategic ways of rebuilding a crushed empire, you never develop strategic escape methods.”
2)”Here you don't understand what can be learned from losing major battles. You've always leaned on your experiences being from ways of improving your winning battles. Hence if you were ever faced in a scenario where you've lost major units/places you'd have little to zero experience on trying to stop a strong marching enemy.
You're not the first to hide from dealing with major losses and even losing. Anyone can play a game and give themselves advantages to win, yet only some can play a game they are losing all the way to the end.”
3)”if you continue playing a game you are losing then you learn to improve your defensive strategies. I can tell you from my own personal experiences it takes courage to keep playing when you know you will be losing the game.”
4)”Well if you cannot remember the last SP game where you were losing and played to the end then you have a history of avoiding loss and seeking easy victories. Review your gaming history.” (end NT Jedi posts)
While I’ve clearly stated I reduce the steepness of my learning curve and that I give myself a strong starting advantage, I’ve never said I didn’t play losing games or in tough defensive positions. I’ve lost lots of battles and fought in many tough defensive positions in games. MMORPGs as multiplayer and online games constantly strive to prevent cheating – while I certainly optimize my strategy and tactics for my personal enjoyment, I’ve never even tried to ‘cheat’ (do something that the online company: Microsoft (Turbine) or Sony would consider cheating.) I did have some very powerful tools and characters when I was part of a special test team for Turbine in AC but we were expected to optimize our time and accomplish certain goals in testing new patches (on a test server). I played other games on Microsoft’s multiplayer system including: Birth of the Federation (BotF – Star Trek) where I played games at least until I thought them hopeless versus the caliber of player I was playing and then I politely resigned and congratulated my opponents. Finally as long ago as the early 70’s I played chess both in high school and at a local chess club receiving a rating just over 1800. That included losing but it also included playing versus players that I resigned to before the end because I knew and respected their quality of play. It also included a few amazing comebacks when I felt the player could still be beat. I do the same in playing versus the AI in single player gaming.
I simply already know when I start a new game that I want an advantage. Also after learning some games thoroughly I want to do some mindless exploration for fun sometimes and will start in a position that is probably impossible to lose. I play in my style for my enjoyment. In competition with other players I never cheat and the existence and style of the other’s mind provides fascinating exploration of the game that I thoroughly enjoy even while losing.
(aside 1)
NT Jedi posted:
“Changing an already decided future within a game is just as fair as changing an already decided future of a thrown dart. The little grand kids call this a "re-do", yet usually by high school they've grown out of this weakness. “
The game is not a simple linear experience to me. If the game allows save/reload I make use of it. In a non-tournament game of chess I would frequently allow an opponent to change their move if it was a significant blunder that threatened the “challenge” of the game. In fact there is a common practice where a player would say ‘en guard’ if the opponent was exposing their queen to being taken. This in effect allows them to review their play sometimes even allowing a player to change their move. I would politely allow this ‘re-do’ and it made the game more interesting rather than simply ending it for the other player by his blunder.
It’s also interesting that you impugn the idea of a ‘re-do.’ As a senior US Army Captain I went to Fort Leavenworth for a staff school called CAS3 (cubed), the school picked up the nickname “Re-Do” U because the US Army felt it was more important to have us senior captains redo our finished work so we could learn and perfect our skills.
(aside 2)
NT Jedi posted:
“You follow game code?? How would someone not follow game code?? The game's programming code cannot be changed.”
It depends on how you define ‘game code’. As early as the gold boxed series of AD&D games, certainly in Civ and MOO, I hexedited games. In the gold boxed games I examined the games files including the exe and find out which hexcodes were used for the various AD&D items. The writers literally input items in the order they were in the hardback AD&D books and so you could guess from known hexcode what other items’ hexcodes were. Experience points were also in hexcode so find your current exp pts in hex and change it to what you wanted. I found this exploration of the hexcode added fun and enjoyment to the gold box games I’d already beat. Also Paradox games like the EU series and Hearts of Iron series had savegame files in English that you could easily modify to change all sorts of conditions (these games also have cheat codes well documented in their game manuals.) Some players also did very elaborate mods including the “CORE” mods for Hearts of Iron. Hexcode is a form of code … was I following game code when I edited these games? Or was I changing the games code? Is editing a savegame OK while changing other gamefiles not OK? In Medieval Total War there were building and unit files that if changed effected all gameplay even new games – is changing them following game code? I read someone else’s public work on these files in modding a game and have done this too.
I still am reading what I consider your opinions, NT Jedi. I beginning to wonder if you’re the one in denial. But at least for now I find this exploration interesting.
Thanks all for your patience!
Re: Preferences & opinions R personal.
LOL 
ominions_505 ____Released: May19th___Year_82,008
Linear Mode
