posted 06-15-99 11:06 PM ET        

Since the issue has arisen again, only this time outside the context of "what if", the following that was written by a fellow CMN is being copied here. I did make a few minor adjustments to the wording, as this was wrote with a specific game in mind.

The list can be discussed and modified as needed. but lets keep this format.

RULE: a statement on an issue that has been determined and closed. IE: RULE 1: Multiple reloading of the game is cheating.

ISSUE: any currently debated tactic or issue. IE: ISSUE 1: Should you be allowed to use the design workshop to upgrade units?

PROPOSAL: self explanatory.

The following was wrote a while back, so there may be things changed. But, it is a good place to start.

Remember, the CMN of the specific game has the final word. CMN court is only a tool for the CMNs to use when seeking help on an issue.

posted 06-15-99 11:09 PM ET            

1. The CMN (Creator / Moderator / Narrator)
Prepares the scenario, determines who plays which faction, sets passwords and starts the game.
Acts as a neutral referee whenever a question or problem arises. Takes action against cheaters (see below).
Maintains a flow of information between the players, by e-mail or using the forums, posts the player's reports, verbatim or not.

2. The players
Pledge they will abide by the rules and play an Honest game.
Do not cheat or intentionally take advantage of SMAC's "features".
Refer to the CMN whenever there's a problem or question.
Notify the CMN of possible cheaters.
For the sake of making the Challenge known and interesting to the outside world, the CMN will create a story thread so the players can tell the world what their faction has been doing. It does not have to be every turn, and should not be a technical report of troop movements. Readers are interested in tactics, grand war stories and so forth. It should also be written in such a way that it does not reveal too much of the player's strategy. Stories may also posted directly on the Forums.
The last player in the turn (i.e. Peacekeepers) must send a copy of the saved game to the CMN.

3. Cheating
We start these challenges to have good fun and to see who are the better players. Someone who cheats, by his very act admits that he is a loser and is not worthy of participating in the Challenge.
The following things are considered cheating for the sake of this game. The list may not be comprehensive. If something unexpected happens, the players will decide if it is considered a cheat or not. The CMN has the final word on any decision.
Thus, when in doubt, always ask the CMN before committing a potentially illegal maneuver.
1> Any reloading of one's turn. Probably the easiest cheat around, and impossible to trace (That's why we need Honesty)
2> Upgrading units with the Workshop and using them in the same turn. It is acceptable to use this feature at the end of one�s turn. And one can use it at the begining of one's turn, if you just discovered a technology. These limits are necessary.
3> Multiple Drops or Orbital Insertions using the right-click menu.
4> Carry terraforming trick. Crediting up your formers and moving them to a new location to get instant improvements. CMN has the right to allow this action on a case by case basis.
5> Use of the Scenario Editor (of course)
6> Use of Probe Teams against allies bug. The �default� behavior, is always declare Vendetta. You can always re-pact or treaty on the next turn.
7> MP allows diplomacy between human players even if no first contact was made. This allows for two rules.
A: Make "in-game" contact before using diplomacy with that faction. Once the Council has been convened for the first time, this restriction is lifted. (NSNC: No See, No Chat)
B: No communication restrictions. (Unrestricted)
8> Social Engineering changes "for just one turn" (eg. to build Elite Rovers or cheap "SP-builders") are forbidden. A minimum period of 5 turns per row is OK. Again, Honesty is the key.
9> Renaming a city to cash in multiple artifacts. A �normal� name change is acceptable. (this bug has not been verified)
10> Unbalanced base trading with the AI. All base trades must be CMN approved. If you trade a mega-base of yours for a starter base of the AI, and don't get prior aproval, it is still considered an illegal tactic.

4. Sanctions
Whenever a cheater is detected: inform the CMN and the player of your concerns. A determination will be made after a review of the game save. Disputes can be resolved in the CMN courtroom. All other players will be notified of the final decision. The CMN can take the following measures against cheaters.
Destruction of terrain improvements or units.
Destruction of capitol base, or other base(s).
Enact nerver staple penalties.
Institute a fine of energy credits.
Exclusion of the Challenge. Replace the cheater by another player, or by the AI if no other player can be found.
There would become public knowledge of the cheat, the CMN determination, the name of the cheater and other details through general forum discussion. If someone don't like embaressment? They should not cheat. The CMN will take a turn for the player, to enact any of the penalties.

posted 06-15-99 11:31 PM ET            

2> Upgrading units with the Workshop and using them in the same turn. It is acceptable to use this feature at the end of one�s turn. And one can use it at the begining of one's turn, if you just discovered a technology.
These limits are necessary.

3> Multiple Drops or Orbital Insertions using the right-click menu.

4> Carry terraforming trick. Crediting up your formers and moving them to a new location to get instant improvements. CMN has the right to allow this action on a case by case basis.

5> Use of the Scenario Editor (of course)

6> Use of Probe Teams against allies bug. The �default� behavior, is always declare Vendetta. You can always re-pact or treaty on the next turn.

7> MP allows diplomacy between human players even if no first contact was made. This allows for two rules.
A: Make "in-game" contact before using diplomacy with that faction. Once the Council has been convened for the first time, this restriction is lifted. (NSNC: No See, No Chat)
B: No communication restrictions. (Unrestricted)
This should be determined at the start, before the game is shipped.

8> Social Engineering changes "for just one turn" (eg. to build Elite Rovers or cheap "SP-builders") are forbidden.
A minimum period of 5 turns per row is OK. Again, Honesty is the key.

9> Renaming a city to cash in multiple artifacts. A �normal� name change is acceptable. (this bug has not been verified)

10> Unbalanced base trading with the AI. All base trades must be CMN approved. If you trade a mega-base of yours for a starter base of the AI, and don't get prior aproval, it is still considered an illegal tactic.

I hope the double info is not confusing anyone. I figured it best to pull the list from the above post.

posted 06-16-99 10:02 AM ET            

I would like to setup a page where all problems related to PBEMs would be posted. I am not talking about forum here but a notice board which can be used as reference.

We could display all cheats, major bugs and anything else that might be useful.

posted 06-16-99 10:06 AM ET            

And, Alex, as to finding people willing to adhere to these rules, I don't think that would be a problem, I know at least 10 who already do (7 in Aredhran's Challenge, plus a few others)

posted 06-16-99 03:33 PM ET            

Examples:
Illegal: you move your impact rover down the road 1 tile so it's next to an enemy base, begin an attack but cancel because the odds are not in your favor. You go to the DW and upgrade your impact rover to a missle rover, and then re-initiate the battle, which is now in your favor.

Legal: you attack with your impact rover, and luck has it it won. all units have been moved, and you go into the DW and upgrade your 4-1-2s to 6-1-2s.

Legal: you get missle tech. you decide to upgrade all your 4-1-2s to 6-1-2s at the start of your turn, before ANY units are moved.

Illegal: You attack and empty a base with a needlejet, capture the base with another unit, Upgrade your needlejets to a fusion reactor so you can move the jet into the newly captured base. The Jet would be ready for a first run on the next turn, contrary to game design.

posted 06-16-99 04:26 PM ET            

jimmytrick

posted 06-16-99 04:57 PM ET            

One of my other suggestions was just to disallow using the DW in PBEM games, but that got dropped as too many griped. (there were good points to both sides of the debate).

This is one of the grey areas that would be determined by the CMN at the start of the game.

posted 06-16-99 10:19 PM ET            

1. Build supply crawlers for cheap using good Industry SE, then switch to bad Industry SE to add now high cost supply crawlers to Secret Project, and finally switch back to good Industry SE to finish Secret Project inexpensively.
2. Switch to friendly SE, do diplomacy with AI faction, immediately switch back to unfriendly SE.
3. I don't know about the elite rover problem.

posted 06-17-99 01:45 AM ET            

The 5 turn per line guideline was something heavly debated in the game forum, when Yin's list for patch 4.0 fixes was being made. The players were split about 60/40 in favor of some sort of social engineering limitations. The 40% either believed the changes were ok to use, or that if you don't "cheat" you would have no need for SE limits.

As with a lot of the guidelines in the list, remember they are just that, guidelines. The list provides a starting format of issues to be determined by the players and CMN. I find the 5 turn limit makes the game more challanging. I have played enough games i am familiar with *most of the SE effects on gameplay, whereas a new player involved in a PBEM should have some latitude to try diffrent things. The 5 turn limit will even make the most experienced player give second thought before making a switch, as 5 turns can be a long time in this game. LOTS of sh*t can happen in 5 turns.

noteworthy: It is a per line limit, not a total SE limit. IE: SE choices on the first line are police state / democratic / fundy. If you change to fundy in 2150, you can still change from planned to green in 2152, but you have to keep the fundy choice until the time limit passes.

posted 06-17-99 03:15 AM ET            

You can, in the same turn, switch to "power", do your attacks with your now-elite rovers, then switch to wealth and rush build your SP... (with your units back to vet/commando.

It's always the same "cheat" idea. Like cous said, the 5 turn limits was fixed arbitrarily (by me) after a long, hot debate on social engineering changes in the original Challenge thread.

I guess we could start the discussion again (that could be fun and interesting)

posted 06-17-99 09:17 AM ET            

2.3 as now explained by Aredhran is clear too

Of course when a limit is to be chosen, one can say it's arbitrary: or do you think that 54 mph is safe while 56 mph is dangerous?

posted 06-17-99 09:21 AM ET            

You're in Power. You have your Elite rovers. You switch to Wealth, rush build what you want, and in the same turn, for no cost, change back to Power and smite thine enemies.

posted 06-17-99 09:25 AM ET            

re: 5 turns is too much depending on the situation

Well, that's when the flexibility comes in, I originally intended the "5 turns" to be a guideline, not a strict rule.

You have a good point. But what I really wanted to avoid is: Fundy/Power, capture one base, then back to Dem/Wealth, wait one round to repair units then back to F/P and so on.

posted 06-17-99 04:37 PM ET            

As such, I think that the following are actually rules: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, part of 8, 9, and 10. The rest (2, 7, and the other part of 8) are probably best classified as issues and separated from the "official rules".

posted 06-17-99 06:36 PM ET            

2. It's that games rules themselves don't allow you to upgrade an individual unit if it already consumed even a little bit of its movement that turn, so it seemd in contrast, just a loophole NOT to be taken advantage of (if correctly porgrammed, upgrading from within DW should have taken account of moved units).

posted 06-17-99 10:58 PM ET            

So, make it an option like communications, Open or NSNC. But when there is a choice on rule settings, one has to be a default. If a CMN wishes to customize a rule, that is up to them. It should be one of the things agreed upon before the game is shipped.

I feel that a default choice should be the one with the strictest limits. In the event of a dispute, the CMN can allow a easier limit if it was not set at the begining.

posted 06-18-99 06:21 AM ET            

RULES

Cheats (not allowed):
A1> Multiple reloading the game to try for diffrent effects.
A2> Multiple drops or orbital insertions using the right-click menu.
A3> Taking advantage of the Secnario Editor bug.
A4> Carry terraforming trick Crediting up your formers and moving them to a new location to get instant improvements. The CMN has the right to allow this action on a case by case basis.

Settings:
B1a> Upgrading units with the design workshop not allowed.
B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn.
B1c> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed anytime.

B2a> Treatied or Pacted faction probe team action answer "Declare Vendetta".
B2b> Treatied or Pacted faction probe team action answer "Let off with stern warning".

B3a> Communications between factions not allowed until you meet in the game. Restriction lifted after first counsel caled.
B3b> Communications between factions allowed from the start. No restrictions.

B4a> No base trading with the AI at any time.
B4b> All base trading must be CMN approved.
B4c> Unrestricted base trading.

posted 06-18-99 07:07 AM ET            

When there is ongoing diplomacy but an action is taken that would degrade relationship to Vendetta (direct attack, probing, base building in enemy territory, etc), the trade must be suspended until the offended player has had a chance to review the changes. That is, it's illegal for the attacker to press the Accept button until the following turn.

Not really a cheat, I agree, but still something that ought to be mentioned.

posted 06-18-99 08:33 AM ET            

The strategic implications of base trading are highly subjective. I pity the CMN who implements this setting. It is inevitable that he will be blamed for ruining a game by allowing a trade.

War is an elegant dance of death. It's all about time and space.

The size of bases traded is not critical. Like real estate, its location, location, location. A key base trade could make or break a game, IMHO.

But, as long as it is a setting, I can just opt out of games using settings I don't like! Great!

posted 06-18-99 08:40 AM ET            

I think that in most cases, the answer to that question will be NO.
- would you trade a base allowing a potential future enemy to get close to your empire ? NO*
- would you trade a big base for a small one ? NO*
- would you trade away a secret project ? NO*

* Disclaimer: YMMV, some specific situations could be a YES

posted 06-18-99 08:52 AM ET            

Base trading is altogether too subjective, too critical, too much involvement and responsibility to be a CMN thing. IMHO. A good CMN would be like a good basketball referee. Doing a good job if you never notice him. This setting might result in a larger game role for a CMN than anyone wants.

But, I am not objecting to having this as a setting.

I shall now butt out.

posted 06-18-99 09:14 AM ET            

Also, I think B2a should be moved up to the cheats section - the choice is really with the other player, not the CMN. I think we're going to need more entries in the B5 section - how about one that disallows flipping back and forth between SE choices in the same turn? Also, it would be nice if we could come up with a good SE rule that would selectively knock out the crawler-SP problem without limiting the other uses of SE.

posted 06-18-99 08:54 PM ET            

Not true. Upgrade All in the DW upgrades all of the selected units.

"Also, I think B2a should be moved up to the cheats section - the choice is really with the other player, not the CMN."

That is why it is not in the A catagory. The A catagory are enforceable by the CMN. The are instances that the player would want to choose the other option. Being listed in the B catagory indicates the L#a is the default selection in case of a dispute. You may have two players that choose to "warm up" their probes on each other. In this instance, "b" would be the appropriate choice.

"how about one that disallows flipping back and forth between SE choices in the same turn?"
The game allows you to switch SE, and switch back and get a refund of the cost. I feel that doing it to lick the AI arse is an abuse. I also feel the intent was to allow you to see the effect on your bases, and if for example the switch causes too many drones, you could switch back. There is no way to expose abuse of this. It is an honesty issue. Pick you opponents carefully.

Also, the 5-3-0 SE options do solve a lot of the SE problems, including the supply transport issue.

"Just don't "pre-approve" a treaty/pact with another faction when that faction is poised to do something nasty to you."

Someone has to click accept first, and in good faith the the other faction is not going to do something that causes declare vendetta on that turn.

posted 06-18-99 08:58 PM ET            

Cheats (not allowed):
A1> Multiple reloading the game to try for diffrent effects.
A2> Multiple drops or orbital insertions using the right-click menu.
A3> Taking advantage of the Secnario Editor bug.
A4> Carry terraforming trick Crediting up your formers and moving them to a new location to get instant improvements. The CMN has the right to allow this action on a case by case basis.
A5> If a player employs a tactic that causes a state of vendetta, They are not allowed to "accept" a pending diplomatic agreement with that faction.

Settings:
B1a> Upgrading units with the design workshop not allowed.
B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn.
B1c> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed anytime.

B2a> Treatied or Pacted faction probe team action answer "Declare Vendetta".
B2b> Treatied or Pacted faction probe team action answer "Let off with stern warning".

B3a> Communications between factions not allowed until you meet in the game. Restriction lifted after first counsel caled.
B3b> Communications between factions allowed from the start. No restrictions.

B4a> No base trading with the AI at any time.
B4b> All base trading must be CMN approved.
B4c> Unrestricted base trading.

posted 06-19-99 06:30 AM ET            

he was really referring to a stray thought I posted:
--------- MoSe (that's me!)
2. It's that games rules themselves don't allow you to upgrade an individual unit if it already consumed even a little bit of its movement that turn, so it seemd in contrast, just a loophole NOT to be taken advantage of (if correctly porgrammed, upgrading from within DW should have taken account of moved units).
--------

but then , even if I didn't comment, I rather agreed with Bingmann's:
-------- Bingmann
MoSe- Actually, the game as designed is very consistent. If you upgrade a single unit, it requires all of it's moves. There are two ways to upgrade all units of the same design, and both of them allow the units to move afterwards. The first method is the "Upgrade" button in the Design Workshop. The second method is when the computer automatically asks when a new technology is discovered. I see no overwhelming reason why upgrading all units should be forced to work the same way as upgrading a single unit.
----------

That, as a matter of fact, was my STARTING POINT OF VIEW! IMHO, upgrading thru DW is a *different* tool: you can't choose a partial set of uinit, you've got to upgrade the whole type, and pay the whole price.
I accepted tho the objection, that if you do it only in the moment you realized that ther rover you're moving stumbles in an opponent too hard to kill, or survive to its counterattack, then it seems like cheating. As stated, "save_my_arse_kick_yours" LAST_DITCH_strategy, hehe.
Otherwise, as I see it, the single upgrading units has to use its whole movement that turn NOT because of a general gaming principle, but to make you pay for the flexybility of your choice (well, ...maybe).

The game is FULL of annoyment, that range from BUGs, loopholes, flaws, glitches.. etc.
And they come finely interspersed with the game's intended features .
So we should try to correct those that would ruin the game, trying at the same time to renounce to game options as less as possible.
Upgrade thru DW I see it as a feature, maybe its implications are not handled tha best way, but is one of the few easy_to_use & comes_handy options in the DW UI!

posted 06-19-99 06:51 AM ET            

I was the first (known to me) perpetrator, but at the same time I was the one to bring immeditaly the issue to the attention of the CMN of the challenge and to a sort of CMN council.

It was kept private, coz the reaction of the offended was awaited b4 taking any decision or even warning him: like a test, since it was the first case.

I hadn't the time then to disclose it all on the forums, now it's about time.

I'll start a new topic about it, reporting the lively interchange of E-mails that occurred.
There, the earnest reproach was of unfair behavior, but none said cheating, some took even my part and praised my ruthless cunning (they're all CMNs!). Now I see I ended in the cheater section...
BTW, the offended proposed a further tech trade, not making the least mention of the affair! That's the bad thing, opposite as you would think: the offended didn't even realize we passed thru a state of vendetta b4 signing the treaty! Thus, some safeguards must be enforced.

posted 06-19-99 11:39 AM ET            

How could you ever be certain that the recipient of your sneaky little trick was unaware?

Perhaps he did piece it together. Perhaps he thinks like me.

jimmytrick

posted 06-20-99 09:09 PM ET            

A6> Setting a unit's home base to a pactbrother's base. ( as is possible in SP )

Please see thread 'A good bug!' in Strategy & Tactics.

posted 06-24-99 03:06 PM ET            

I also suggest you first put it before the forum for ratification. Who is the head CMN?

If you guys have a leader he should take charge. If not vote one in or something. Just to move it along.

jimmytrick

posted 06-25-99 05:12 AM ET            

Now cous is taking over the rules, which is great since I don't have much time to spend on that (with Hi-Tech and the newbie terrorists and all my PBEM games )

cous, if you don't mind being in charge of the list, that would be great. Once it's finalized (word is fine, but what about HTML ?), make sure you send a copy to AsianFlu, as I promised him I would do that for him.

posted 06-25-99 08:44 PM ET            

Update:

RULES

Cheats (not allowed):

A1> Multiple reloading the game to try for diffrent effects.
A2> Multiple drops or orbital insertions using the right-click menu.
A3> Taking advantage of the Secnario Editor bug.
A4> Carry terraforming trick Crediting up your formers and moving them to a new location to get instant improvements. The CMN has the right to allow this action on a case by case basis.
A5> If a player employs a tactic that causes a state of vendetta, They are not allowed to "accept" a pending diplomatic agreement with that faction.
A6> Treatied or Pacted faction probe team action answer "Declare Vendetta" unless permission is received in advance from the other player to "Let off with stern warning".
A7> Setting a unit's home base to a pactbrother's base is not allowed.

Settings:

B1a> Upgrading units with the design workshop not allowed.
B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn.
B1c> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed anytime.

B2a> Communications between factions not allowed until you meet in the game. Restriction lifted after first counsel called.
B2b> Communications between factions allowed from the start. No restrictions.

B3a> No base trading with the AI at any time.
B3b> All base trading must be CMN approved.
B3c> Unrestricted base trading.

B4a> Social engineering choice limited to one switch per line every 5 yrs.
B4b> Social engineering choice limited to one switch per line every 3 yrs.
B4c> No social engineering limits. (or custom setting).

posted 07-02-99 11:33 AM ET            

Seriously it is strategy. It is like sending someone through boot camp and then sending him through mission specialist training.

posted 07-02-99 02:11 PM ET            

The effect is little different than convoying minerals from one base to another. In that instance you get full value for your minerals, but at a slower pace. There is also the initial investment in the crawler.

As an intermediate application, you could build units in other bases, be they crawlers or other, move them to the base constructing the new unit, and disband them. This loses half the minerals but allows 'prebuilding' of units in a way.

Alternately, you could rush the construction initially, substituting energy in varying amount, for minerals, but saving time.

The legitimacy of these types of trade-offs is implicit in the existence of 'stockpile energy' build commands. (or its analog in CivII, or MOO2)

Indeed, time and resource management decisions are the heart of empire building games. Construing this as a cheat is difficult to support.

This is a totally different issue than whether the unit should be moveable in the turn of its upgrading.

posted 07-03-99 08:18 AM ET            

I design and build a few 2-1-4 foils, with the intent of upgrading them with the workshop, and using that turn. Time constraints in the game do not afford waiting a few more turns to build a gattling foil. Having to wait one more turn because of using the design workshop for upgrading, would put the time at the same, as if the gattling foil was built in the first place. I decided not to do the upgrade as the tactic is in question, and brought it here. I asked the CMN of the game, and this is the response I recieved:
"CousLee,
at this stage of the game this is OK with me, as long as you forward this message to all players to give them the chance to do the same. The main reason i deem it all right is the time frame of the game - one year should be plenty to change the main weapons & crew of a tank battailon or whatever.

Should someone disagree, please call a vote. I would break a tie, with a "no" (surprising, huh ?) to future upgrades like this, because it is against Meiers intention, and, well, it *is* a slight abuse. Right now, it is not a big, heavily abusable problem, but once "drop, trained" changes to "blink, X" things might start to get ugly. Maybe we should
set an upper ceiling energywise ? techwise ? gameyear-wise?" (slightly edited).

I disagree with those comments. The game year, or units involved are irrelavent IMHO. Either this is an allowable tactic, or not.

If allowable, what CMN notification guidelines should be used? Just let the CMN know of your intent so it does not appear to be a illegal tactic? or more strict guidelines, and if yes, then what guidelines?

B1a> Upgrading units with the design workshop not allowed.
B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn.
B1c> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed anytime.

How should this be revised? Is the concern when the "upgrade all" is used?, or when one uses upgraded units.

I also disagree that the other players should get anything. If this is a strategy, then I should not have to tell my opponents what that strategm is.

"B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at end of turn."

Is this better?

B1b> Upgrading units with the design workshop is allowed at the begining and end of turn only. (either before any units have moved, or after all units have moved).

posted 07-06-99 08:02 AM ET            

As Bingmann and I said before, that is a different tool than upgrading a single unit, and it would be a pity to lose it.
Now you come out with:
-build, upgrade AND move/attack_with a unit in the same turn
-drop, upgrade and use a unit in the same turn

I guess we will never come to think in advance of all possible tactics and implications of it.

So, I'm ever more oriented for two possibilities.

B1c, all the players are aware that even s.m.a.k.y.� tactic is a legal tactic of the game, knowing that in such case, if you upgrade a half-moved recon rover to a missile rover and attack, you would be forced to upgrade ALL your recon rover and PAY for them, i.e have enough money to do it.

OR, the issue is not WHEN in the turn you use DW upgrading, but all the involved units movement state when you do it. I explain: you must NOT have halfway moved units, OF THE TYPE you're DW upgrading, when you do it.
That is, if you upgrade recon rovers, all your recon rovers must either be "Already Moved", or still with their full movement points available (and these you can move and use for attacking after the upgrade). If even only one of your recon roves has moved of 1 and has still the 2nd movement point to use, you can't DW upgrade R.Rovers till you finish to move that one.
I guess that anyway nor this condition, neither if you used the DW upgrade at the beginning, end, or in the middle of your turn, can be possibly spotted or traced by a CMN, so as usual honesty remains the key.

posted 07-06-99 09:12 AM ET            

Use of captured units in UDW.

1. popped Unity units
2. bribed units
3. probes (!!!)

1. Unity units DO NOT appear in UnitDW, so there's no issue for them, since you can't use tham a s a template.

2. when you bribe a unit whose components you haven't yet discovered, its design get added to DW. There, you can click on it to examine its design and characteristic.
If you try to design an unit, you don't get the not dicovered components in the list of availble components.
But if you edit the bribed unit, you read "new unit based on existing design" (or something) and you can keep there the components you don't have.
Say, you capture a (6).1.1 unit. Your top weapon are impactors. If you click on the weapons box, you'll not see missiles to choose. But if you don't touch weapons in the design, you could alter the chassis, or the abilities, and design a 6.1.2 missile rover, or a 6.1.2 Missile Foil with Deep Radar, without having discovered missiles at all. This way ALL designs that use exactly THAT component are actually available, coz you could alter everything of the rest, putting in anything you've discovered. Like you had discovered the component yourself.
Beware, if your top weapon is 6 and your top armor is 3, and you bribe one 8.1.1 unit and one 1.4.1 unit, in NO WAY you could build any 8.4.x units (should you want to, just an example! )!
Some claim that this is a legal reward when you put the hands on a new piece of tech from battle loot. Other think it should be declared illegal.

3. PROBES!!!
Imagine you discover Planetary Networks before you discover Mobility. Probes movement is 2, probably to express the idea that spies are sly and swift. For how the DW is implemented tho, the double movement of probes is not obtained as an inherent special bonus of that kind of unit only, but simply using speeder as chassis! Without having discovered that type of chassis, and without having bribed units that use it!
So, when you discover probes, you can alter their design, substituting their probing equipment with weapons or other equipment, and add armor or abilities at will, and you get any kind of rovers your current tech allows, without having Mobility tho.

I guess some final conclusion should be reached on that issue.
For now, I feel free to use 2. where not explicitly denied (and no CMN did yet), but I refrain from using 3. (not an usual occurrence indeed).

posted 07-06-99 09:30 AM ET            

Let's restrict rules to what can possibly be enforced. Otherwise, it's only the honest players who are restricted to the benefit of the "cheaters". All of the rules so far can be enforced by a CMN comparing two sequential save files. (I'm not sure about the Scenario Editor bug since I don't know what it is.)

posted 07-06-99 10:17 AM ET            

About your little rant on upgrading based on captured units... I have never tried this, or tested it in any way (hence my surprise in Flotilla when I saw these 1-3-1 garrisons everywhere without having H-E chemistry).

I feel it's a valid use of a game feature. The fact that you are not allowed full freedom of unit design compensates for the lack of proper requisite tech.

The probe/rover upgrade on the other hand, *is* a cheat, and must be prohibited.

posted 07-06-99 12:32 PM ET            

I fully support rules to counteract obvious bugs (multiple right click drops) and cheats (using ScenEd or reloading), but I am coming to despise all of these rules that seek to essentially redesign the game. If the game works a certain way and it's not an obvious bug, then that's the way it's supposed to work. If you don't like the way the game was designed, too bad. Make your own game or lobby Firaxis to change it.

Regarding captured units and the Design Workshop, Firaxis had to write code to put the captured unit into the DW, so yes, it is meant to be there. It also specifically says "Editing an existing design", so you're supposed to be able to do that, too.

With regards to probe teams and speeder chassis, they could have implemented the probe team "weapon" in exactly the opposite way they implemented the transport "weapon" (+1 move instead of -1 move). They didn't do that, however; they used the speeder chassis. It may be a matter of opinion as to whether or not they overlooked the fact that players would be able to edit the probe team to use the speeder chassis, but I don't see how this can be classified as an obvious bug - there is no evidence that they are seeking to resolve this in a future patch.

posted 07-07-99 07:24 AM ET            

First, please don't look at it as a bunch of add-on rules. This list has never been finalized, so add-ons are not possible . The list is why we are discussing these issues. Final inclusion on the rules is not set in stone for a lot of things.

I intentionally used that "feature" in the Flotilla (CMN benefit ) just to raise this issue.
I feel that:
1> You should be allowed to build exact copy of what you captured, but question altering that design with other components. I think that is the intent of the game.
2> using the probe rover chassis to design other rover chassis units should not be allowed.