-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
DSYoungEsq said:Except that this one has drawn the attention of the MP playing community from day one, and it isn't a "trivial" concern.
Doesn't change my point at all
FAL said:
well, then obviously you should forbid (or atleast declare "gamey") increasing your INNOVATIVENESS as England to 6 (to get the merchant adventures and the muscowy trade company) and then dropping it again to get enough missionaries/colonists.
Last edited:
I'm fairly new and newbie to this MP community, but I've GMed the two ATEs plays, well, thank God the players there have always been a nice group of gentlemen , so my work have been very cool and relaxed. But from the list posted by FAL this is what I've forbidden as exploit (as he did, RED the bad the forbidden ones, GREEN the allowed, WHITE ones I never thought of them ):
, so my work have been very cool and relaxed. But from the list posted by FAL this is what I've forbidden as exploit (as he did, RED the bad the forbidden ones, GREEN the allowed, WHITE ones I never thought of them ):- Attacking an enemy fleet with pirates, as well as comparatively very small fleets, only made to inhibit loading/landing.
- Releasing one or more vassals during wartime, to hinder an enemy.
- Force-burning of manufactories, i.e. repeated move and halt orders to an army in a province with a manufactory.
- Using lag to your advantage. This includes (but is not limited to): Sending lag colonists, building lag fortresses, sending lag missionaries, using lag diplomats. (An exception can be made for sending lag diplomats to send cash).
- Declaring a 'fake' war on a country, with the aim to:
- Increasing the stability of the nation you declare war on.
- To get around a rule that bans map-trading, by sacking the capital of the nation you want maps from.
- To change the religion of a protestant or Counter-Reformed-Catholic nation back to Catholicism before the Edict of Tolerance.
- Exploiting Simultanity: Using the game engine to break a deal, that would occur simultaneously in the real word. This includes (but is not limited to) the 'sale' of something in game.
- Using bugs listed in the bug thread to your advantage.
- Converting from Catholiscism to either Counter-reformed-Catholicism or Protestant and then switching back to Catholiscism before the edict of Tolerance.
- Breaking a truce, when at negative stab.
- Sending loans to the AI.
- Not leaving a human alliance, despite the alliance leader asking you to do so.
- Landing armies in the port of a country you are in war with, because of Military Access.
- Trading maps with the AI.
- Cancelling being the vassal of another player within 10 years.
- Vassalising countries when you are below centralization 8 (only with the recent beta patch).
- Avoiding the Spanish bankruptcy events, despite owning the provinces that trigger them for the majority of the time.
FAL,
Just a read a post which brought back a memory from NOIV.
Spies left in another nation after war or through MA.
If the owner of the land says "withdraw" I believe one should withdraw through unmapped land as soon as it is suitable (for example waiting for summer if that lessens attrition), as was your GM decision in NOIV when I left cavalry in Russia and proceeded to map it.
Just a read a post which brought back a memory from NOIV.
Spies left in another nation after war or through MA.
If the owner of the land says "withdraw" I believe one should withdraw through unmapped land as soon as it is suitable (for example waiting for summer if that lessens attrition), as was your GM decision in NOIV when I left cavalry in Russia and proceeded to map it.
ForzaA said:well, then obviously you should forbid (or atleast declare "gamey") increasing your INNOVATIVENESS as England to 6 (to get the merchant adventures and the muscowy trade company) and then dropping it again to get enough missionaries/colonists.
I don't, since that would cost an English player 20 years and two stab hits. Also, you are now more referring to general event abusage and not specifically to switching religions back and forth.
In general I find it gamey if players try to avoid nasty, but important, events, like the Spanish bankruptcy or the Ottomans going orthodox in the Bej events. (I have added those two individually).
Last edited:
Daniel A said:
Agreed, this is often a problem with Russia and Siberia. But how to word it?
well, what's the difference between 20 years and 2 stabhits, and a -5 stabhit twice in ~10 years?FAL said:
Mind you, you're ofcourse perfectly in your rights to *declare* it a gamey tactic, I'm simply curious what your reasoning is why you find it gamey.
ForzaA said:
I find it gamey to switch religions back and forth. It doesn't matter if you do this for the cash in general, for a temporal morale advantage or to reap the benefits of a particular event. It's a general gamey tactic I like to ban in my games. Others will probably disagree and want to make an exception for the Swedish event situation. That's fine. It is than an exception of the general : Do not switch to protestantism and then back to catholicism rule and has nothing special to do with event-abusing.
There's another type of exploit and that's trying to avoid nasty historical events, or reaping the rewards of an event, while trying to avoid nasty side-effects the event also gives.
If I mark the Swedish example as an exploit, I do this because of the religion switching, not because of the event-abusing (though it is an example of event-abusing as well). Thus, I am not going to automatically ban other event-abusings, because this is not the reason I ban the Swedish one.
I hope I am somewhat clear here
As for event-abusing in general, I am trying to figure out which ones I find an exploit and which not. So far, I have listed avoiding the Spanish bankruptcy events and the Ottomans going Orthodox in the Bejs as a gamey tactic.
FAL said:I find it gamey to switch religions back and forth. It doesn't matter if you do this for the cash in general, for a temporal morale advantage or to reap the benefits of a particular event. It's a general gamey tactic I like to ban in my games. Others will probably disagree and want to make an exception for the Swedish event situation. That's fine. It is than an exception of the general : Do not switch to protestantism and then back to catholicism rule and has nothing special to do with event-abusing.
There's another type of exploit and that's trying to avoid nasty historical events, or reaping the rewards of an event, while trying to avoid nasty side-effects the event also gives.
If I mark the Swedish example as an exploit, I do this because of the religion switching, not because of the event-abusing (though it is an example of event-abusing as well). Thus, I am not going to automatically ban other event-abusings, because this is not the reason I ban the Swedish one.
I hope I am somewhat clear here
As for event-abusing in general, I am trying to figure out which ones I find an exploit and which not. So far, I have listed avoiding the Spanish bankruptcy events and the Ottomans going Orthodox in the Bejs as a gamey tactic.
Well, I believe I originally brought in the Swedish (and English events) as a reason why religion switching SHOULD be allowed in some cases atleast - as BESIDES these events, there's no reason AT ALL to switch back to catholicism if you plan to go protestant, so why forbid it?
Certainly, I can see the point in forbidding to go protestant if you plan to be catholic (as this nets you a reward of 25 ducats per province) -- but the conversion protestant -> catholic, and a later catholic -> protestant has no benefit in and of itself.
Ofcourse, noone who's thinking WOULD want to do it, except, PERHAPS for these events, so either you shouldn't (need to) forbid it*, or you should forbid it to prevent people from using it to gain the benefit of these events.
In which case I (would) ask you why you forbid it for those events, but not for the aforementioned merchant adventures and muscowy trade company and innovativeness shifting.
* Maybe in that case you should also forbid giving up provinces in peace?
ForzaA said:
I will answer: Switching from catholicism to protestantism to gain cash and then switch back to catholicism is disallowed in my games. I feel your pain if you then miss the benefit of that particular event, if you are Sweden, but that's just too bad. Other GM's will probably make an exception, that's up to them.
I am not forbidding Sweden to do it because of the event-abusing, but because of the rule against religious switching, so I don't need to talk about other events in this case.
Clear now?
I would phrase the spy rule thusly:
If you have an army present in another nation's territory and you are not at war with this nation, you must withdraw this army from his territory if he requests that. When you withdraw you may not move through land not mapped by you and you should take the shortest reasonable route. To avoid unnecessary attrition you may postpone the withdrawal
1. and take winterquarters in a province with relatively good supply
or
2. until an army that stands in your way moves away.
------------
The word "reasonable" has been inserted to cover cases where a longer route may be better to use because of e.g. position of fleets, explored areas etc.
---------
Regarding the bey event. How can it be gamey to choose ortho and suffer the -6 stab that Paradox believed suitable?
In fact: how can it be "gamey" to choose any alternative in any event that has been offered us by Paradox?
I am entirely perplexed We appear to stand 100 miles away from eachother. From a non-RP point of view I find your attitude unreasonable and arbitrary.
If you have an army present in another nation's territory and you are not at war with this nation, you must withdraw this army from his territory if he requests that. When you withdraw you may not move through land not mapped by you and you should take the shortest reasonable route. To avoid unnecessary attrition you may postpone the withdrawal
1. and take winterquarters in a province with relatively good supply
or
2. until an army that stands in your way moves away.
------------
The word "reasonable" has been inserted to cover cases where a longer route may be better to use because of e.g. position of fleets, explored areas etc.
---------
Regarding the bey event. How can it be gamey to choose ortho and suffer the -6 stab that Paradox believed suitable?
In fact: how can it be "gamey" to choose any alternative in any event that has been offered us by Paradox?
I am entirely perplexed
We appear to stand 100 miles away from eachother. From a non-RP point of view I find your attitude unreasonable and arbitrary.
Daniel A said:Regarding the bey event. How can it be gamey to choose ortho and suffer the -6 stab that Paradox believed suitable?
In fact: how can it be "gamey" to choose any alternative in any event that has been offered us by Paradox?
I am entirely perplexed
As you can see I coloured the bej event option green in the second. I allow it in my games.
However, there are GM's who want to forbid it, since they find it gamey to let the Ottomans become Orthodox teched, while they should be muslim. Probably because of balance purposes.
I think this is the only example of an event-option that has some controvery attached to it.
Mind you, if I list something, it does not automatically means I agree it is an exploit or gamey. As I said, I allow it myself.
the_genius said:I'm fairly new and newbie to this MP community[...] WHITE ones I never thought of them
I am surprised you know so many exploits as a newbie by the way
ForzaA said:
Perhaps I seriously miss something here.
What I am talking about is: Sweden is catholic, she switches to protestant shortly before the event to gain 25 ducats per province, then she switches back to catholicism to let the event make her again protestant and give 250 ducats extra.
Now, where are you talking about?
FAL said:
This is what you wrote in post 49
FAL said:
Thus you have in post 49 explicitly stated it was as an "exploit" and as "gamey" and in the last paragraph in post 53 you implicate that such actions are not allowed by you.
I take your clear statement in post 53 about you allowing it as an evidence that you have now changed your mind and do not anymore find it gamey nor an exploit and thus will allow it in your games. Good!
Or clouds temporarily darkened your mind when when you formulated post 49 and thus it does not mirror your true view on the subject (this is the easy way out for you FAL
) and you have always intended to allow them. Also Good! 
i have no clue what this means:
i do understand the words but the whole sentence doesnt make any sense for me... :wacko:
can someone please explain it to me? maybe with an example?FAL said:
i do understand the words but the whole sentence doesnt make any sense for me... :wacko:
I am talking about a Sweden that wants to be protestant (as all her provinces are protestant)FAL said:
for ~10 years (1520-1530 approx), this will mean low stab costs (relatively) and more census tax.
Then, to get an event she changes her religion to catholic (read: increases innovativeness by 1), and gets an event, which changes her to protestant,(read: gives 2 explorers, a boatload of merchants and money) she remains protestant after that and profits again from full tax income, and low stabcost(read: she reduces her innovativeness by 1 again to get more colonists and missionaries).
Cicero said:
A war is fought, during which no money can be transferred between the countries.
The countries agree that A gets one province of B, and A pays 500 ducats for it.
Peace is concluded, in which A gets the province, A should then transfer the money (via gifts or loans), after the peace has been signed, to B, but there's NO way to enforce this.
(well, it is possible to transfer money the other way in a peace signing, but it's very difficult to make working, I'm not even sure if it works in MP, it's somewhat of a quirk/ not an intentional feature in any case)