What's a Blog?
Published on October 19, 2007 By Mumblefratz In Metaverse

This is where we will keep all the rules used for the Metaverse League (MVL). The point is to have a single place where all rules are defined and so there's a single place where people can refer to resolve all question.

I will continually update this OP to reflect the current state of rules that we have all agreed to. The point is to make this as simple and concise as possible. As we have seen argument and upset occurs when different people have different interpretations of what has been agreed. Keeping these rules as simple and short as possible will help reduce potential conflict.



Rule 1) Rule changes are not allowed in the middle of a round. If an unanticipated situation develops in the middle of a round all effort should be made to deal with it as consistently as possible based on current rules and precedent. In the hopefully rare cases this is not possible the Commissioner will make an arbitrary ruling on how the matter will be resolved for the current round. Once the round is over then the issue can be revisited and a more permanent solution can be decided by the members of the League. Note that this arbitrary ruling can only be made by the Commissioner. Also the Commissioner is the only person that can grant an exception to any rule, but this power should be used judiciously.

Rule 2) Team Size. People may join the League and start playing at pretty much anytime. In the middle of a round a new player should be randomly assigned a new team by either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner. The only limitation is that at any point in time no team should have more than one more player than any other team.

Also people may have to announce that they can't submit during a round. This can be treated using the scoring rules related to non-submission or if it's early in the round the teams could be re-balanced by the Commissioner. The decision to re-balance or not, and if so who to move, is soley the decision of the Commissioner.

The ideal team size is 5 since it provides some protection against an unforeseen non-submittal without being too unweildly. Team size at the beginning of a round should never be less than 4 or more than 6.

Rule 3) Honor System. Each round of play consists of a game (or games) of randomly selected settings and victory conditions. Very few of the required settings can be verified, namely galaxy size and victory condition. The fact that all other settings cannot be verified requires the league to operate on the honor system.

From time to time various versions of the game may exhibit a bug that temporarily allows some particular exploit. When and if this happens people should make sure the league is aware of the situation but no rule will be made to prohibit the particular exploit other than the same honor system that ensures everyone is playing the same game.

A final point about the honor system is that abuse of the honor system doesn't debase a single game played by a single player but debases every game played by every player. When seen in this light I'm sure that no one would be tempted to risk shaking the foundation of the league just to gain a miniscule benefit by intentionally bending a setting or rule. Also everyone should realize that honest mistakes do happen and if occasionally someone makes a mistake in a required game setting that it's no real big deal.

A corollary to the fact that only galaxy size and victory condition can be verified, along with the practice of taking a game submitted to the metaverse but not submitted to the league as a persons "intended" league submission, results in the rule that people should not have games submitted to the metaverse under their league character that might be confused with a legitimate league game. Note that clearly once a player has made a submission for the current round there can be no such confusion.

Honor System Addendum

The deliberate and determined use by a Player, with full knowledge and intent, of repeatedly and excessively, exploiting bugs, quirks, or other miscellanea in a game to achieve an outcome not normally possible is hereby prohibited in the MVL.

Rule 4) Reported Difficulty Levels and Race Customization in MVL Games

Every MVL player is honor bound to ensure that the effective difficulty of any game they submit is accurately represented by the games posted difficulty. To support this requirement the following guidance is provided.

External modification of any game related files are prohibited in MVL games.

In-game modification of opponent characteristics is prohibited in MVL games. The only choices allowed are the selection of opponents from among the default standard races and default custom race and the selection of their difficulty levels.

All opponent starting relations must be set to "Unknown".

DA games must be set to Allow Surrenders.

Rule 5) MVL Member Behavior

In the case where a MVL member has been found to be cheating, being overly disruptive, or detrimental to the League in some form, the commissioner is free to levy the following punishments as he deems necessary and appropriate. Such punishments may include; the loss of a team Captaincy or other MVL Administrative Position, the loss of the Player's points earned in a particular Round, forcing the Player to sit out a Round, or any other temporary punishment deemed appropriate.

For anything deemed worthy of a permanent ban from the league then besides the recommendation of the commissioner it should also require the consensus of the captains and other MVL administrators to make the ban permanent. Once banned then continued disruption of MVL threads and activities will be appropriately reported to forum authorities.



Scoring

A team's score consists of the sum of "base" scores plus individual and team bonus points.

Base Score

A player's base score is simply 2 points for a win of the designated type, 1 point for a win of the wrong type and 0 points otherwise. A team’s base score is the sum of the four top player base scores submitted. This is done so that a team having more players has no advantage over a team with fewer players.

There are two types of rounds that are treated slightly differently. One is a “Single Victory” type round where all players play for the same victory condition. The other is an “All Victories” type round where each team must submit at least one game of each of the 4 different victory types.

Non-Submission

In the Single Victory round if a player neglects to submit a game then there is no issue as long as the team still has at least four other players that submitted a game. However, if the team only had four players to begin with then they would be missing one potential contribution to the team’s base score. If this non-submission is pre-announced (this is highly encouraged), then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select another member of the team to submit another game to count towards the teams base score.

In the case where no notice is given, if the player has a single game that fits the rounds criteria as to date, galaxy size and victory condition posted to the Metaverse but not yet submitted to the league then that game will be presumed to be submitted "automatically" to the league during the last minute of the round. If there are more than one qualifying game posted to the metaverse under the players MVL character than the game with the highest score/year ratio will be the game submitted to the league. If two or more games have identical score/year ratios then the submitted game shall be randomly selected from these games by the commissioner or vice commissioner whichever is not a memeber of the team in question. Note that players should make sure that any games that "appear" to match the current rounds criteria posted to the MV do indeed satisfy all the current rounds criteria. This can always be accomplished by simply waiting until your official has been made before posting a game to the MV that might otherwise be confused with the current MVL game.

In the case where no notice is given, and if other members of the team have other games that satisfy the round’s criteria that have already been submitted to the metaverse then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select one of these games to count towards the teams base score. In this case the team should identify *all* such games that satisfy the round’s criteria for possible selection not simply the *best* such game.

If the non-submission is not pre-announced and the team has no “extra” qualifying games then the team gets credit only for the number of base scores properly submitted.

Note that a team of 5 players with two players that failed to submit a game would be in a similar situation as described above and the same rules apply. The same is true with 6 players and 3 non-submissions, etc. It is also possible for a team to be more than one submission short of the required total of 4 in which case the same rules can be applied to possibly allow the team to make up for more than one non-submission.

Finally these same rules apply in the case of an All Victories round but with an extra qualification. This extra requirement is that in an All Victories round each team is required to submit at least one game of each victory type. In this case the team may be required to use an “extra” game as described by the rules above that duplicates the victory type of an already submitted game. In this case for base scoring purposes that game would have to be considered a 1 point victory of the wrong type. Note that such a game could still receive individual and team bonus points based on the correct victory category.

Individual Bonus Points

In the case of a Single Victory round a single bonus point is granted for the 4 top scoring games and the 4 fastest games.

In the case of an All Victory round a single bonus point is given to the top score and the fastest game in each of the 4 different victory conditions.

The fastest games are determined by the number of years reported by the metaverse. Game speed ties are broken by score and score ties are broken by speed. Any games tied in both speed and score will be left unbroken and both players will receive the identical bonus.

Team Bonus Points

All team bonus points are based on the average of the team’s submitted games. Just as in the individual bonus point case only wins of the correct type are counted. The 1st place team receives 2 points and the 2nd place team receives 1 point in the following categories.

Team Score

Team Speed (speed of game reported by metaverse)

Team Submission (number of days into the round before game is submitted to the league)

Any teams tied in any team bonus category receive the same bonus. However, any fractional result is not subject to rounding and any tie must be exact.



MVL Voting Rules

1. Any MVL member can call for a vote among any number of competing proposals which must be seconded by two other MVL members to be considered official.

2. All votes will occur in the Galciv II Metaverse Leagues forum at the Core and notice must also be given in the current MVL Round thread.

3. All votes should run for a period of time specified in the OP of the voting thread. This period should be no shorter than 1 week or longer than 3 weeks. It's encouraged but not required that votes should be completed before the start of the next round of play if at all possible.

4. A valid vote requires participation by at least 50% of active MVL members. An abstention counts as participation. A proposal requires 60% or more of the cast ballots to be accepted. If less than 60% is achieved by any one proposal there will be a runoff between the two most popular options. The winner of the runoff will be the proposal that achieves a simple majority of votes cast with no quorum requirement.

5. Editing of your vote is allowed although any changes should be made in such a way as to make it obvious that a change has occured.

6. Once the time specified for the vote expires the thread will be locked to maintain an accurate record of the vote. The results of any vote are final and can only be changed by a subsequent official MVL vote.

Rules accepted by Consensus

From time to time minor issues may crop up that may not warrent the full attention of the League. In such cases a limited number of members may discuss the issue and come to some agreement. As long as no member of the league voices any objection to such an agreement and as long as such an agreement has been posted in a prominent thread (the current round thread or the MVL Rule thread) for a period of one week then that rule will be considered to be "official" by the league.

Besides any MVL member voicing an objection to the proposed rule, thereby invalidating the proposal, any member could also move to have a vote taken on the proposal which, as specified in our voting rules, requires a vote be taken as long as the motion is seconded by two other MVL members.



Last update Mar 28, 2008. Added Race Configuration Rule and Honor System Addendum

 


Comments (Page 25)
31 PagesFirst 23 24 25 26 27  Last
on Mar 14, 2008
If Cari flags this as a cheat then the discussion will be moot since flagged games are not submittable. Otherwise it's up to us. I don't have a problem with it. If you want to play with a universe full of evils or with all oppenents having super spy, then more power to you. Personally, I don't plan on modifying my opponents in any way, but I will set my super ability and alignment if I can.
on Mar 14, 2008
Folks, i see a problem. We need to address this issue now or we will lose the MVL. This is splitting us apart and we need to decide one way or another.

Personally i like ARC's and dont care too much for "straw dogs".

If it will save the MVL, lets ban them both.

The writing is on the wall.
on Mar 14, 2008
I'm with you, neilo. The MVL is way too important to allow "ARC" to derail it. I don't like the idea of "straw dogs" at all and didn't realize that it could even be done before it was brought up here. With that in mind, I'd like to see the "ARC" thing cheat flagged in its entirety.

The honor system is working well for us and we should probably just not allow any changes that can be made outside of the normal game interface.
on Mar 14, 2008
Just to clarify, straw dogs are made within the normal game interface. It's really a seperate but related issue from xml file editing. When you talk about cheat flaggin ARC, you need to be clear whether you mean editing the xml file, which can change characteristics of your own race, or setting up weak custom opponents from within the interface.

In any case, I agree the important thing is just to get consensus. If that means banning both ARC and custom opponents, then that is fine with me.
on Mar 14, 2008
My opinion is pretty black and white. All MVL games should be played with stock races. The custom stuff and ARC are all well and good. It's fun. It mixes things up. Good stuff that gives the game great replay value. Use it all you want. Just not in the MVL.

For the record. A ruling any which way, would not cause me to opt out of the MVL.
on Mar 14, 2008
Alright, a few things:

1) I see two different uses of ARC, and they need to be distinguished. One is using ARC to set up opponents. The other is using ARC to modify the "player race".

2) Modifying the enemy: This is only slightly different than using in-game custom races. The chief difference is the ability to change every race's starting world to Thala, making the initial rush blitz a breeze no matter how many enemies. This is probably already covered by the "straw man" rule... play a game that accurately reflects the difficulty of the level. Taking one starting world away from every AI does make the game easier on the player, even though you are giving the AIs higher PQ worlds to work with. Any form of altering opponents, in game or ARC, seems covered by the latest rule added, and so this is probably less of an issue.

3) Modifying yourself: Here is where I see real abuse that goes beyond an honor system. Things changed in DA that didn't exist before. The ability to stack bonuses, and races that came with HUGE ability boosts that was supposedly balanced by then giving them weak SAs. If you combine a strong SA with one of the races with a super ability suite... and then add in your pick of starting worlds (Oxor or Thalis... they both have real advantages...) and you can make a race which is better than any custom race, and better than any stock race. Evil Krynn with Spore Ships (and Oxor or Thalis) seems especially insane to me, because that huge +70% morale the Krynn get combines with the low post-spore populations to let you rape the Population score at an insane rate as you are able to keep breeding at 100% even with a high tax rate for a long time.

But really, with the ability spread, any combination of Evil alignment, Altarian, Krynn (or maybe even Korath or Drengin) stats, Oxor or Thalis starting worlds, and Spore Ships, Super Hive or Super Breeder is going to get you a setup that could beat any scenario. I like the Krynn for any scenario where tech trading is on because of their also large diplomacy boost, and Altarians for any scenario with tech trading off, because you can combine the power of +65% research and spore ships and screw the rest of the universe. With the Altarians I can get my first spore ships by turn 3!! I can knock out 2-3 AIs before they even get a chance to do more than launch a few colonizers.

Giving spore to any race, and making it cheap and easy to go evil are huge, HUGE advantages that completely unevens the playing field. Any race that has to use troops to invade takes a score hit because of how population scoring works in this game (although I can almost get close with Super Breeder... an argument can be made). Krynn are SOOOO insane because Super Spy sucks. They get a suck starting system, and a garbage super ability, and +400% in abilities to balance out the weaknesses.

Its not at all like in DL where bonuses didn't stack, and the best race was the Drath abilities wise, and the DL Drath are seriously underpowered abilities wise compared to the DA races. And (thankfully) TA is taking all of those huge racial bonuses away and moving them to the tech trees. But in DA its a problem, because the ability boosts that you can get dwarf what is possible in any other version.


Its a matter of competition. I don't think the stock DA races are perfectly balanced, the Iconians really suck hard for instance. But there is at least SOME balance there. If ARC is legal, you will HAVE to use ARC to compete at your best, because you can cherry pick the best of all worlds for the race you play with. No pure Stardock stock race can compete with Evil Sporing Krynn... or Evil Sporing Altarians, or Evil Hiving Altarians... etc. etc.

I don't like it because you are quickly left with about three "best" combinations that leave everything else behind. If it is allowed, it must be used by anyone trying to seriously compete.

But if it is banned, those that have gotten used to it may leave. I don't like it, but I can use it. I'm not saying for sure I will stay, however... I've only been in two rounds and I'm just one player. But the MVL as I envisioned what was going on and the MVL with everyone using super powerful ARC races are two very different things. The game needs several higher difficulty levels if you let the players mix and match like this.


I HOPE CariElf actually decides to check and ban the system. As has been noted, this problem goes beyond the MVL, ALL metaverse games that use DA are on an uneven playing field as long as these ultimate combos are available.


My thoughts on this... at least so far,
~ Wyndstar
on Mar 14, 2008
Opps...

I guess Wyndstar's response regenerated a new burst of interest in this topic.

Currently I have a proposed rule that was pending "default approval". I hear a lot of talking but I haven't heard anyone say that they explicitly objected to the rule that I proposed.

So what are we doing here?

Has anyone explicitly objected to my proposal?

If so then it appears we should define a few reasonable choices and simply vote on them. If not then what's all the talking about?

The issue that I see with explicit prohibitions against ARC and straw dogs (should be men not dogs but I digress), is that it covers a wide range of things. As JustinSane points out straw dogs are achieveable via normal DA in-game interfaces. Banning xml file editing is clear cut and simple. Banning in-game editing is a very slippery slope. Where is the line drawn? Are we going to prohibit the selection of stock races that just happen to be intrinsically weak?

I still believe that my proposal covers everything. The only issue is the fact that it's subjective.

Anyway if folks wish to proceed down this path then they need to define explicit rules that they wish to propose that they feel will correct the situation. These rules will invariably be complex if they get into which in-game configurations are allowed and which are to be disallowed.

The issue I've seen with the above proposals is that the proscribed behavior is not well defined. If your giong to get into the nitty-gritty details then you must insure that you don't leave any loose ends. Otherwise you're leave everything up to interpretation which is presumably what is wrong with what I proposed.
on Mar 14, 2008
Has anyone explicitly objected to my proposal?


Mumble, your proposal seems fine to me, and even a preferred solution to dealing with "straw.... opponents". There are things you can only do in the xml (set starting worlds) and things that you can only do in-game to not trip the cheat flag (take away all starting tech). Handicapping your opponents in any of these ways is dishonorable, and should go against the honor code. Your rule seems fine to cover this case...


My problem is with xml editing of what you play as. Its been said a few ways above, but I really think the MVL should be clear, and have a rule one of two ways:

1. ARC is fine - play with what you want as a player
2. ARC is banned, play with the stock races or custom races, altering only what Stardock lets you alter for each race in game.


You can't have some sort of middle ground rule, because if ARC is legal it must be used to compete. Its got to be a choice between one or two. Seems some people want to leave no matter which is adopted, there are strong opinions both ways.

I would vote for 2, but I can play under either. Its a different game under 1 though.


Also, again, this is an issue larger than the MVL. Is there a thread Cari is reviewing where people are arguing the pros and cons of what this means to the metaverse as a whole?

~ Wyndstar
on Mar 14, 2008
Personally I will not be using anything but stock races in further rounds. I used stock races this round and I submitted what I think is a pretty good game. If it put me at a disadvantage, so be it. I really think the easiest way to resolve this is not to leave it up to the player. Use stock races only. If we do have a vote and this is a choice, that is the way I would vote. Regardless, my interpretation of Mumble's suggested rule is stock races only.
on Mar 14, 2008
Actually a game not playing as its reported difficulty could be achieved in two ways. The first is the obvious lowering of the AI cababilities that make your opponents not credible opponents at the level you selected.

The second method would be by creating an uber race that again makes the competition not the same as reported.

I still think my proposed rule does deal with all these issues as long as folks can be honest in their estimation of how the game actually played. If folks can view their game honestly then I believe that they will know when it's right and when it's wrong. This avoids the specification of a lot of detail which in the end is no more enforceable than what I've proposed. Yet my rule would still allow some level of modification for game "flavor".

In the end any rule revolves around the honor system. My one sentance cuts to the essence of the issue in all cases without going into all the painful detail.

As far as the Metaverse in general, I did PM Cari and referred her to where this was initially discussed. That is the How do you make custom races Metaverse compatible? thread where she did comment that she would need to think about it.

As far as your rules even if you go with rule 2 I still believe you need to have a rule similar to the one I proposed to eliminate the in-game editing that Iztok showed could cause an AI to play far beneath it's level. In that case there is no point to having your rule 2 since my proposal covers the essence of that as well.
on Mar 14, 2008
A lot has been said about how, if using ARC and straw dog opponents are allowed, using them will be necessary to compete. Concern has also been expressed that the competition so far in the MVL has not been fair since some players have used these techniques and others have not. I checked the results so far this round to see whether they indicated whether or not A. people were using ARC and B. whether there was a gap in results in favor of those who did.

In a worse case scenario where ARC has been a dominant factor, one would expect this round to see a lot of evil Altarians and/or Krynn, with these being the highest scores and fastest times.

The results (with one screenshot not showing)

6 people used Altarians with 3 going good and 3 going evil. The average score of the good Altarians (presumably non ARC, since I know I didn't use ARC and Ferrel has come out against it, and why wouldn't you go evil if you were using it?) is 10,971.67 and the average speed is 2 years. The average score of the evil altarians was 1,2808 and the average speed was 4 years.

3 people used custom (strongly indicating no ARC). The average score was 7,478 and the average time was 3.67 years.

1 person used Krynn and scored 9,250 in 4 years (likely ARC).
1 person used Korx and scored 16,385 in 1 year (best score and fastest time, no ARC, 60 hours real time)
1 person used Korath (presumably not ARC) and scored 5,220 in 6 years.
1 person used Torians (presumably not ARC) and scored 5,375 in 5 years.

So, anything useful in all that? It looks to me that on the whole players who probably used ARC (and this is just a guess whether they did or not) scored better than average and also had somewhat stronger than average times. It is possible that players who knew about ARC were more likely to be dedicated, experienced players than some, but this is tough to tell.

On the other hand, several (presumably) stock games are right there with the likely ARC games, with Wyndstar's being clearly the best (though he really earned it with all the time it took). Both 1 year victories so far were achieved without using ARC or straw dog opponents. I'm not sure that this indicates ARC has been essential to compete this round.
on Mar 14, 2008
As to a clearly formulated rule that takes care of straw dog opponents: Why not just "no custom race opponents"? That seems pretty clear to me and does not seem to start a slippery slope. Clearly, a player can make a custom race weaker than any stock race, and if you're using stock races, you can only pick the Iconians for one slot.

Personally, I think a "No custom race opponents and no ARC" rule might be a more clear formulation than Mumble's proposal, if Mumble's rule is in fact intended to mean "No (weak) custom race opponents and no (strong race) ARC". Just my take on that.
on Mar 14, 2008
Use stock races only. If we do have a vote and this is a choice, that is the way I would vote. Regardless, my interpretation of Mumble's suggested rule is stock races only.

This is still not sufficient. As Iztok showed you can use stock races and use in-game assignment of abilities and still get a weak opponent. You need to ban ARC and ban in game adjustment of opponents other than the simple selection of difficulty level.

And even if you do this what have you accomplished. You're still dependent on the honor system for everyone to abide by those rules. What real difference is using the honor system to put in "reasonable" constraints on a practice that many people seem to feel adds enjoyment to the game?

If you don't trust folks to acknowledge that the game they played represented the reported difficulty than why would you trust that they abided by the prohibition of ARC and in-game adjustment?

I'm playing DL and AFAIK there is no such issue in DL. I'm perfectly willing to let those that play DA make the decision on this but I do think everyone agrees that it would be a shame if the league splintered apart because of this issue.
on Mar 14, 2008
To correct my post on the statistics (since I can't figure out how to edit it): Games played with (presumably) non-arc races actually were faster than games played with (presumably) ARC races with an average of 3.2 non-ARC and 4.0 ARC. This further indicates the balance between ARC and non-ARC, so far, hasn't been too bad.
on Mar 14, 2008
I still think my proposed rule does deal with all these issues as long as folks can be honest in their estimation of how the game actually played.


Mumble, I appreciate your trying to bring sanity to the issue.

However - there is still a problem with Suicidal, because there is no higher difficulty level. For people that are used to using ARC races suicidal might "feel" right using these super races. If ARC is allowed at suicidal for some, it should be allowed for all. Otherwise, I am being penalized for never having used it, and now being used to a harder game. If ARC is legal for some at suicidal, I should not be barred from using it just because I'm used to a different version.

As far as your rules even if you go with rule 2 I still believe you need to have a rule similar to the one I proposed to eliminate the in-game editing that Iztok showed could cause an AI to play far beneath it's level. In that case there is no point to having your rule 2 since my proposal covers the essence of that as well.


Seems to me 2 rules are needed because you are dealing with 2 different situations. What Iztok brought up is valid, and there are many, many ways to try and handicap the AI. This seems like it does need to be up to the honor code. In game or with xml, just don't do it. With this, we create a level playing field of what everyone plays AGAINST.

But what you play WITH? There is a huge difference between ARC and non-ARC races. A score difference, a speed difference, an ability difference, etc. It seems for what you play with ARC either is OK or its not, because it creates a competitive imbalance, and what "feels" right to one person does NOT necessarily create a level playing field with other competitors. For what you play with, I need to know if I'm allowed to use this or not.

1 person used Korx and scored 16,385 in 1 year (best score and fastest time, no ARC, 60 hours real time)


And if not for the amazing real time grind, I almost think my method should be illegal as well. I told my Teammates how I did it in our protected forum, and will be happy to discuss what I did after the round.

The question, though, is what COULD I have done if I was using an ARC race with the same method? The answer is, I could have done even better...

~ Wyndstar
31 PagesFirst 23 24 25 26 27  Last