I'd like to change my statement to:

If you join a game without checking the settings, don't complain about it. :-)

dat was totally stupid u can see it standing out easily
just because he outsmarted people means he restrospecka

also it seems seroslav u were the only who didn't notice dat bonus

I don't agree with those who say it's not cheating.

Ask Yourself a question, why the guy did a thing like this? And of course to win easily, giving no chances to others.

For me it's a cheating and text about checking settings are ok, but don't make this kind of stuff moral. It's not moral, it's cheating.

U can not agree. I don't care. As for me if guy do like this, it's obvious (I'm not stupid) that he's goal was to cheat. It's obvious for inteligent people I think :)

It's obvious that the guy hope that nobody else see the 100 bonus and that he will pick it up and get it.

Maybe for those who don't agree that's what the Warlight is about and what Warlight should be. For me it's not fair play, it's cheating, and the same would be when in sport people compete and some of them bribe the referee or take drugs. This is not what competition should be about and it's absolutely no fun to play a game, where others cheat by far.

If U think it's ok, maybe ask Yourself for your values, moral values :) cause it's seem that do whatever not moral stuff to win is ok for You. It's pathetic.

And it doesn't matter if it's according to game rules or not.

The rules are bad then. The game is done wrongly then.

How they could be changed? For example when bonus income is multiplied by more than 2, then there should be some kind of Attention sign, like there is for guys who join the game and they are blacklisted by us. Then such a game (not in settings) but in the view of all available games, should have a sign that bonuses income are much changed.

It's similar kind of cheating, when in some bank agreement there is small star "*" and with tiny letters there is written some not nice thing, just others not to see it. Some will see and some won't, and I fully agree to them that they have been cheated.

The guy didn't want to play, he wanted to cheat, that's all. The Warlight shouldn't be a game of "who more smartly will cheat another", right?

People do seem to be too argumentative on this forum. The settings were 100% intended to fool people joining the game and lead to an easy win. Just because some people check the settings doesn't mean everybody does, not least people new to the game.

It's cheating plain and simple.

agree with window and seroslav

The ONLY advantage this player has is over people who didn't check the settings. In a 3 player game, he still only has a 33% chance of getting that territory first if all players choose it. All he has done has designed an (extremely) unbalanced scenario (of which there are MANY on WL) and attempted to gain the advantage first.

I agree with you Seroslav, that changes such as this should be more obvious. But if you had checked the settings before making your picks, you had exactly the same opportunity as he did for that bonus. Learn from your mistake, blacklist the individual player, and move on.

Bad gamesmanship and cheating are two different things entirely. I would never make a game like this, but I also wouldn't want people on my team that don't check the settings before playing (before or after joining is up to them) and use them to their full advantage.

Seros

then what do you do when they change all bonuses by whatever base number is ultimately decided, then one of them by considerably more? would you say that fizzer needs to fix that, or would you tell the people to read the settings...
any rules that you make that will be an effective deterant will remove possible customization, and will likely not be a deterrant to any underhanded players that are determined to be underhanded..

If someone runs a red light, IRL, and you're making a legal right turn, and he sideswipes you.. your car is still wrecked.. next time.. watch the f***ing traffic..


Fizzer has already spoken on the problems with showing the differences between standard and non-standard, check the UV and post a suggestion that is more feasible, that will not hinder more players then it will hurt, and perhaps you will have some grounds.

Underhanded tactics =/= cheating

>>"It's not moral, it's cheating. "

Cheating is a state of rule-breaking, not a state of morality..
breaking truces is immoral as well, and likewise not cheating

>>"the same would be when in sport people compete and some of them bribe the referee or take drugs."

This would only be relevant if there was a constant set of game rules.. each game is determined by the rules set by the host.. and cheating would consist of breaking those rules in order to win..
He set the rules to have a bonus with a higher income, which is clearly shown in the settings...
You could have the Join button be on the settings page, and then even include a *are you sure?* page, which most people hate and ignore.. which would not only not-solve your problem, it would cause more dissent...
you could even highlight any modified settings, which would cause most games to be more highlighted or not.. which would again, not solve the problem, and cause dissent...
you could add icons for each change that is made to a game.. which would cause gamenames to be shorter then icon length behind them.. which would not solve the problem and would cause dissent..

While we're at it.. let's add in pre-set variables by fizzer for what bonuses should be for maps.. since Fizzer is being expected to inform the player of the bonuses in the map, and possible unbalance.. many maps are unbalanced *without* modification.. many times widely.. so let's inform people, whenever they play those maps, that they have a poor ratio.. which based on the hosts picks.. could be considered 'cheating'

/rant off

When you set up a game and make a bonus huge so that you can take it and get an easy win, that is certainly a bit on the unethical side - the reason is that though the settings are right there for all players to see, you as the creator of the game have an advantage: Certain pre-knowledge of the changed settings because you did it, whereas even the most experienced player could make a mistake and miss the change and lose the game because of it.

Very few people are going to disagree with you on this, Seroslav. Almost everyone thinks its cheesy to change settings to try and gain an advantage that way, and many people will indeed blacklist those who do it.

However, this fact is irrelevant in terms of making the decision as to WHETHER IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. The only feasible way of enforcing against it is by blocking originating IP addresses from the warlight servers, something which is easily done. However, IP addresses change, and IP addresses can be shared between multiple clients because of NAT and subnetting. This means that if you ban IP address X because player_1 was using it when they set up a game with cheesy bonus settings, it's entirely possible (and, given enough time, even probable) that player_1 will be using IP address Y instead, and player_489 will be trying to login for their game using IP address X and will end up getting the shaft through no fault of their own.

However righteous a rule might seem to be on the surface, it is useless if it is unenforcable, as this is. A determined or patient player can do much worse than what you describe here, get banned, and yet easily circumvent that ban using a new account from a new IP address. The only way to get past this would be to implement some kind of identity check as a prerequisite for making accounts, and who the heck wants that, right? :)

As long as Fizzer is very picky about who he bans and for what reasons, he can stay on top of the job, and I for one am happy he's more concerned with people who are overly abusive and immature in chat and on the forums because it doesn't take much of that to turn Warlight into a very negative experience. Someone creates a game with cheesy stealth settings you don't like? It's really no big deal. Take a loss, add to the blacklist, and move on. And play multiday games because the players are cooler! Teehee!

>>"you as the creator of the game have an advantage: Certain pre-knowledge of the changed settings because you did it, whereas even the most experienced player could make a mistake and miss the change and lose the game because of it."


Technically, this is always true, for any setting...

it is cheating but in my previous post i said he didn't deserve to win and was suprised u didn't see it

Again, I agree with Seroslav. Starfantasy changed the bonus because he wanted to win. Sometimes people create a game with a huge bonus, but they write it in the title. For example: http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=1864849

Lumberjack (the host) wrote: "pick south america", meaning is mean that he wanted to have fun and enjoy the game, and he wanted a fair game. Starfantasy didn't write "pick budapest", because he just wanted to win.

"pick south america" makes absolutely no sense when you can't pick (it's an auto-distribution game)...

Sorry for the double post, but there's more settings in that game which don't make any sense:

|> Card Settings
|> - Reinforcement Card in 3 pieces for 10 armies
|> - Blockade Card in 1 piece to multiply armies by 10000% (**minimum 1 piece per turn**)
|> Number of card pieces you get per turn: **1**

Why is that Reinforcement Card there, you'll never get one...

---

Also, reading the first few turns of chat, I get the impression he could've been a little more clear about just *how* badly he beefed up South America.

rvw y are u reviving dead threads

why*

brisk revived it, not RvW

I don't care for pedantic interpretations of rules and settings and such. When it comes down to it I regard it as a pathetic attempt to cheat because you are trying to deceive your opponent if you do not declare it in the knowledge many opponents may miss the alteration.