Do you consider the following things cheating?

[Hoplite7]

Auto-resolving siege battles because the computer doesn't factor in walls or towers.

Placing spikes at the front gates against a faction like the Mongols

Blocking off crusades with ships near Byzantium so that the crusaders march in circles


These are things I do, not sure if anyone would consider them cheating. What do you think? Do you use cheap tactics in your game?

[sapi]

Exploitation rather than cheating, really.

As long as you're comfortable with doing it, it's not really a problem.

[Hoplite7]

Exploitation rather than cheating, really.

As long as you're comfortable with doing it, it's not really a problem.

Well I've always considered it to be compensation for the times bugs have given the enemy victory. (like when my front gate refuses to shut )

[Askthepizzaguy]

Ah, but one is unintentional and rare, and the other is intentional and common.

I consider cheating to be hacking the game files, changing the rules, modding the game in any way. Those are cheats.

The game has weaknesses that can be exploited, but that's not technically cheating. That's like using steroids at the Olympics if all drugs were legal. Sure, you are blatantly taking advantage of a game weakness, but you're playing by the rules, by the letter of the law if not the spirit.

Personally, I don't care if someone is cheating or exploiting so long as they make it clear to all involved that they are doing so. The only real cheating is when you cover it up. For example, doing a blitz run as the HRE using the crusade exploit. Perfectly legal, and ethical too if you make everyone aware of that fact.

Modding the game files to make your game more enjoyable: that's fine too, whatever floats your boat. Just don't claim any accomplishments publicly using a modded game unless you make it clear you have cheated.

Making house rules to avoid exploits and cheats, and limit certain kinds of gameplay, that's great too. Just make sure you mention your house rules and dont get mad if others don't follow your rules. For example, if you think that blitz rushing the AI and sacking their cities is an exploitative way to expand your empire, by all means restrict yourself from doing that. Just don't get you know, whiny if someone else doesn't play the same way.

That's the general rule here, since it's just a game, normal rules and ethics don't apply. The only real rule is don't tell others what to do, and if you're going to talk about your game publicly, let us know what version, mod, house rules, cheats/exploits you may be using.

Another example; using a spy. Spy gets killed on a mission? Reload and try again. It's cheap and exploitative, but it works. Entire family loaded onto a boat that sinks next turn? Reload and try again. I'm not going to blow a game that took me hours to play just because lady luck decided to decimate half of my family in a storm at sea. Especially true when doing a speed run.

It's cheap and exploitative, but I don't see any other way to have fun in this game if I can't even begin to train an assassin because it dies on it's very first mission every single time.

On all my threads where I talk about mods, blitz runs, and so on, I mention the version I am using and what my house rules are, so everyone is up to speed and they can't whine that I abuse the crusade function.

[The Badger]

Hoplite;

That you seem uncomfortable with these exploits -enough to ask -
is I think your own answer; to your question.

None of the exploits you mentioned applied to multiplayer -

Can you 'cheat' the computer?

You used the word 'cheap'; and again i think that is your answer.

Is it as rewarding to you to know you are winning on "cheese" as they say?
it's not as though the AI is a horribly competent opponent most of the time
( i saw a couple of tricks tonight that caught me by surprise- just by being unpredictable)

Anyway; you have to decide for yourself what is acceptable, since no one else is impacted by how YOU play YOUR single player game.

My opinion is -
I'm the kind of person that set kings purse to ZERO and wouldn't play england until the AI got more aggressive navally.
Last time I quit playing M2TW was because it drove me NUTS that the AI's mounted BigBads couldn't dismount (even before the battle) and were getting attrited by my on-wall units inside whatever fortress...

i try to avoid reloads -
I myself do it when the 'pathfinder' does things i consider inexplicable.

[Ramses II CP]

If you're playing against the AI you're only cheating yourself.

I would've said you're only exploiting yourself, but that phrase sounds curiously close to abusing yourself, which has a whole other meaning.

[Guyus Germanicus]

H7,

Computer games like RTW & M2TW don't have conventional rules like checkers or chess. You can't have a bug in a Monopoly board game.

You're playing within the physical constraints of the game. You can set up some artificial rules like - don't autoresolve any siege battles - so that you don't benefit from certain quirks in the game design. But what are you trying to accomplish when you do so - to imitate real life? And there's nothing wrong with that, certainly, if that's what you want to do. Bringing our imaginations to the game experience is part of the fun of a game like this. For me the game is a diversion. I'm not competing with anyone, and I'm not trying to accomplish anything for the sake of bragging rights.

And, it's not as if this game is a perfect imitation of real life. Is the ratio 2 years for every one game turn a valid imitation of real life?

In RTW I never used the programmed cheats (pressing the tilde button and altering the game's play.) But I'm doing that a lot in M2TW. But, in RTW I did make some mods to the game so I could get a public order benefit from academy buildings and scriptoriums and the like. As I understand it, that mod was something that CA had intended to put into the original game but never got around to it.

I guess I would say to you - it's your game and your time, just have fun with it the way you want to. I couldn't do the save and reload thing that some players do when something goes horribly wrong in a battle. But that's just me. But, when I was a kid playing street games with the neighborhood kids, we used to have "do-overs" or "mulligans" and gave the kid who made the "claim" a second chance. (I'm giving my faction members superior administrative skills and trader skills. So sue me.)

The game pulls some "stunts" on me occasionally costing me time, money and soldiers.

Just have fun and do what you want. If you want to set some ground rules for yourself, to govern your relationship with the game. Go for it.

[Eng]

Well I've always considered it to be compensation for the times bugs have given the enemy victory. (like when my front gate refuses to shut )

Your front gate refuses to close only because you put your men 2 close to the gate move them back and it will close.... (works for me)

[Ramses II CP]

Heh, sometimes the gate just gets stuck somehow, possibly from one man getting caught in an unmoveable position. For example in the current Ghazette Challenge siege Gaza on the first turn, and when they sally their gate will be stuck in the open position until you rout a unit through it, even if you sneak behind them and into the city. It's a bug, but it seems to be fairly rare.

[Zenicetus]

I use a few exploits that I know give me an advantage over the AI, but not many. For example, I'll use ships to block the "bridge" at Gibraltar while playing as Spain or Portugal, when I first take on the Moors in Iberia. It blocks reinforcing armies from Africa, and I know the AI is too dumb to quickly build a fleet to contest it. That particular bit of cheese also works at Constantinople, if you need to control troop movements. It's not completely unrealistic because Spain was a naval power, after all, but it is taking advantage of weak AI. Since there is at least a little rationalization for the tactic in terms of relative naval strength, I use it.

Actually, any intelligent use of fleets at all by the player feels like an exploit, because the AI is so bad at it. But what are 'ya gonna do. This is the game we have, and I'm not going to completely avoid the smart use of navies to expand my empire, and block the expansion of my enemies.

I do use house rules to avoid the more egregious exploits like auto-resolving sieges as the attacker, or the "merchant in a fort" to lock up resources, or insta-death by surrounding something with soldiers and dropping another one into the center square. Those tricks aren't as easy to rationalize (well, the soldier surround might be). Mostly it's just pure exploitation of weak chinks in the game design, and I don't need it to win.

[ForgotMyOldNick]

Auto-resolving siege battles because the computer doesn't factor in walls or towers.

I knew there was something wrong. I hardly ever autoresolve unless against rebels, but noticed in a few sieges that I couldn't be bothered playing and autoed noticing that I hardly took enough casualties.

Crusader armies going around in circles would be fun to watch :)

[joe4iz]

I will sometimes put a merchant in a fort, more to keep him from getting knocked off the resource node than anything else. The trade nodes around Constantinople come to mind. Every guy who walks past the top node kept knocking my merchant off. It was very frustrating.

I love to fight seiges so I seldom autocalc them.

[Old Geezer]

Cheating is so realistic just like lying. It is what people do naturally? Has anyone had to teach a (normal) child to lie or cheat? I rest my case.

[Garnier]

Auto-resolving siege battles because the computer doesn't factor in walls or towers.

Placing spikes at the front gates against a faction like the Mongols

Blocking off crusades with ships near Byzantium so that the crusaders march in circles


These are things I do, not sure if anyone would consider them cheating. What do you think? Do you use cheap tactics in your game?

All of those are things I never do. But I am a stickler for my own houserules, I make very strict rules and don't dare break them. I would definitely consider those to be exploits.

[Captain Pugwash]

Cheating is a reaction when something happens, you think thats not right its against the rules.
Thus,
1. AI towns can run at well below 80%PO and not rebel.
2. AI crusades can park outside your city for several turns without deserting awaiting you to complete the crusade so they can attack you.
3. Inquisiors always burn you generals whatever their piety, while the excomed pagan worshipping opposite gets left alone to enjoy drunken romps with little boys.
4. merchants, assasins spies etc never seem to be as successful as the AI when they have similar qualities.

If they AI can screw you then theres nothing wrong in returning the compliment. However thats different to modding the structure to balance out what you percieve to be imperfections.