Cheating

**Aemilius Paulus** · 08-31-2008, 21:41

What I dislike the most is when people try to recreate recreate history while playing EB. I believe history is history and EB is EB. I am a huge history buff and that is why EB is my favorite game. However, I play EB to have fun, to create alternate history (my favorite book genre! Just try reading Harry Turtledove- he's the best). I do not like using cheats either, even to make a game more historical. I use the fog-of-war cheat, but I don't consider that a cheat myself. I use it because of my curiosity to see what is happening to the other factions. I don't use the Force Diplomacy either. I never make peace with an enemy faction. I conquer their territories until they are dead. As for faction balance, I have not seen an enemy faction become too strong. Then again, I have played only one campaign until 200 BC. That was my Romani campaign, which I'm still playing. My Kart-Hadast and AS campaigns are still in their beginning stages. Usually, when I see a faction becoming too strong, I attack it and thus stop its expansion.

**||Lz3||** · 08-31-2008, 22:04

to each its own... I guess

I for example have an historical (yep exact date, bla bla bla smulate defeats etc) and at the same time I have 2 alternate history campaigns for when I'm tired of "fixing" the AI; I highly enjoy both of em' .

Playing historically lets you understand better the history of the faction you're playing IMO and I like that

**QuintusSertorius** · 08-31-2008, 23:29

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

What I dislike the most is when people try to recreate recreate history while playing EB. I believe history is history and EB is EB. I am a huge history buff and that is why EB is my favorite game. However, I play EB to have fun, to create alternate history (my favorite book genre! Just try reading Harry Turtledove- he's the best).

Because personally, I hate alt-history. Especially when a writer takes just one event, and assumes that can be the juncture around which "everything changes".

**Aemilius Paulus** · 09-01-2008, 04:10

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

Because personally, I hate alt-history. Especially when a writer takes just one event, and assumes that can be the juncture around which "everything changes".

Sure why not? If Hitler, Megas Alexander, Khengis Khan, Lenin, William the Conqueror, Peter the Great had died, weren't born or were raised differently, so many events could have not happened. Not everything is inevitable. Without Alexander, Persian Empire would have been never conquered. It is true that Philip II planned the invasion, but who else but him and Alexander could have do it so skillfully? Philip, as a matter of fact, never wanted to beyong Euphrates. Without Philip II, there would not have been Alexander either. Without Philip II, Makedonia would remain a backwards, uncivilised and disunited country full of minor squabbles. Without Philip II, Greece would not have been united. Therefore, without Philip II, there could have been no invasion of Persian Empire (or at least a successful one). Without the invasion, there couldn't have been the Ptolemaic and Seleucid Empires. Nations such as Baktria and Pontus would not exist. History would have been monumentally changed. Pyrrhus would not become who he was either, without the Diadochi.

Saying that if it wasn't Philip II and Alexander who did this, someone else would come up and do it is illogical. If no one in the entire history of Greece, Thrakia and Makedonia prior to Philip's time was able to unite these lands, then it is unlikely that another potential uniter existed in near time period. I do believe alternate history is possible in the sense it is written in the numerous books of this genre. The same goes for decisive battles.

**Bellum** · 09-01-2008, 04:14

It is not unethical to cheat in a single player game. :/

It's all good fun, do what you enjoy.

**QuintusSertorius** · 09-01-2008, 08:57

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Sure why not? If Hitler, Megas Alexander, Khengis Khan, Lenin, William the Conqueror, Peter the Great had died, weren't born or were raised differently, so many events could have not happened. Not everything is inevitable. Without Alexander, Persian Empire would have been never conquered. It is true that Philip II planned the invasion, but who else but him and Alexander could have do it so skillfully? Philip, as a matter of fact, never wanted to beyong Euphrates. Without Philip II, there would not have been Alexander either. Without Philip II, Makedonia would remain a backwards, uncivilised and disunited country full of minor squabbles. Without Philip II, Greece would not have been united. Therefore, without Philip II, there could have been no invasion of Persian Empire (or at least a successful one). Without the invasion, there couldn't have been the Ptolemaic and Seleucid Empires. Nations such as Baktria and Pontus would not exist. History would have been monumentally changed. Pyrrhus would not become who he was either, without the Diadochi.

Saying that if it wasn't Philip II and Alexander who did this, someone else would come up and do it is illogical. If no one in the entire history of Greece, Thrakia and Makedonia prior to Philip's time was able to unite these lands, then it is unlikely that another potential uniter existed in near time period. I do believe alternate history is possible in the sense it is written in the numerous books of this genre. The same goes for decisive battles.

No, based on the Great Man theory of history, it might seem illogical. It's one particular way of looking at the past, not the only valid one. We don't have anywhere near enough information on the influences and trends surrounding events in antiquity to make informed guesses on how things might have changed just because of removing one person.

**Celtic_Punk** · 09-01-2008, 11:52

very true Quintus.

back on topic, what is the exact command to move another factions army? one of my allies is about to attack me and its a quite illogical move since i could just crush ptolemy given my naval superiority and 90% of his empire is coastal.

**Ibn-Khaldun** · 09-01-2008, 19:12

it is move_character "character name" location example move_character "Captain Hercules" x100 y100

About cheating.. I do it.. in some campaigns when I just don't want to bother dealing with money problems or building something I use add_money and process_cq cheats and give myself a lot of money and then build every building in my settlements... but I don't do it often.. This is more like a nice way to relax and have fun in EB..