Great Wall

[newsgothic]

My Egypt v. England. My HA takes his HA. He starts asking for diplomacy. I ignore because it's usually about trading techs and I'm not interested right now. He sends me a message that I'm cheating. He says, "I've got the great wall, you have to accept peace." So I'm supposed to keep track of whether someone has the great wall or I'm cheating? If we are at peace and someone gets the great wall, then fine, I can accept that. But if we are at war, I want to play my own game. I understand the game is glitchy, but I didn't do anything to create that glitch.

Admittedly, I don't have a lot of experience with the great wall, so I'd appreciate some input.

[dukeblue1987]

My view:

If you know (doesn't always happen) that he has the Great Wall and wants peace you should accept, even if at war. If he then declares war at a later time, you should get the rest of the turn to counter attack. If he attacks at the end of the turn and then expects peace at the beginning of the next turn he is insane if he thinks I'm going to accept.

Moral of the story, if the Great Wall guy is playing fair, then you should accept peace. If he is obvioulsy abusing it then I have a problem.

[REM018]

Once you find out that your opponent has the Great Wall and is asking for peace, you have to accept it in my opinion. Otherwise the GW would be useless. It is too bad that the MP version does not enforce it, but that is how it should work. If you consistently refuse diplo despite knowing the your opponent has the GW, I consider that cheating.

Grey area is when you both agree to peace and he attacks later. I think once he gives up the protection of the GW, staying at war is fine. Otherwise the GW would be too powerful. What Duke says regarding giving one turn to counter is widely accepted too, but very hard to enforce IMO. And being able to attack/force peace/attack/force peace. Is just too powerful

It is a pity that the GW does not work properly in GW, but nonetheless it is not difficult to make it work correctly. Accept peace and you wont be able to start a war against him.

What would you say if you used a GB on the GW and your opponent responds: Your problem, we already were at war! I got the responses many times from wannabe good players and it just does not make any sense. So you should only build the GW when you are at peace with everybody? That would be a very weak wonder.

[newsgothic]

If he attacks at the end of the turn and then expects peace at the beginning of the next turn he is insane if he thinks I'm going to accept.

In your example, does he have to request peace at the beginning of the next turn or does the game force it upon you if he desires?

[GrizzleyTigers4]

In your example, does he have to request peace at the beginning of the next turn or does the game force it upon you if he desires?

He has to request it....if he doesn't...don''t offer it....if he is too stupid to ask for peace and take advantage of his wonder thats his own problem....

In dukes example the guy would wait till 5seconds left in the turn or less and attack...then request peace at the beginning of the next turn himself to try and stop a counter.....

[MultiPlayaBeast]

Which is crazy cheating in my book for him to wait till end of turn to ask for peace because you are now cursed with his GW. Whatever on that matter then as war will continue let someone pull a move like that. I agree with Duke's proposition that goes well with tourneys. Accept peace if at war, if GW opponent attacks in a turn the same turn you don't have to accept peace and if the other player is consistently continuing the the attack, make peace and then attack again following turn then that accepting peace due to their GW is obsolete in my book.

[dukeblue1987]

In your example, does he have to request peace at the beginning of the next turn or does the game force it upon you if he desires?

He would have to ask for it.

[ScottieX]

yeah I think our agreement is pretty much that you get (give or take) a full turns worth of time to counter. that could be end to end of a turn or beginning to beginning.

[REM018]

More or less from the last time your opponent attacked. If he makes multiple attacks while the timer is running, then you should get that grace period from the last attack. Each attack eats up timer and you cannot do anything while the animation is up. And if he attacks during the next turn, then your grace period timer starts again.

That whole thing is too complicated IMO. I would say as soon as you intentionally declare war (after you got it), the GW does not protect you anymore. Easier to follow and no grey area.

[dukeblue1987]

That whole thing is too complicated IMO. I would say as soon as you intentionally declare war (after you got it), the GW does not protect you anymore. Easier to follow and no grey area.

This is what I think too but it didn't go over well with other forum members when I brought it up.

[ScottieX]

I dont think Ive ever had a problem other than people just outright ignoring it. people cheat you or they dont. They arent really walking the line anyway.
Most seem to let me counter. many dont even renew the peace afterwards, sometimes I'll do it for them and if i use it I'm not too worried as long as the guy accepts in about 1 turn from the last battle. if he gets a 2nd switch of turn and thus an extra move of his unit, that would be the point it starts to annoy.

[newsgothic]

Looks like I'm in the minority, but I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm aware that the great wall is different in SP. Are you telling me that we should be honor bound to not choose the march upgrade because it behaves more like blitz in SP? We shouldn't move our militia off a galley immediately upon building it either?

There are a lot of risks in the game. If you're worried about having Oracle block a cap, don't build it and don't choose Egypt. If you're worried that the great wall won't work the way you envision, then don't waste a GB on it.

My main contention is this: during the course of a turn, I have a lot to consider. Conducting diplomacy with another player is the LAST thing I want to do. It is not my responsibility to keep abreast of what wonders someone else has. You cannot convince me that ignoring diplomacy is cheating. Let's call the double move cheating too—you can't do that in SP.

But I'm not out to make enemies either—I'd rather concede the match and start a new one.

[HydroDragon]

Let's call the double move cheating too—you can't do that in SP.

You can't move a unit at the end of the turn and then move the same unit at the start of your next turn? Since when?

The GW is only different if you take advantage of an exploit (letting the window time out), the wonder itself doesn't change unless the game glitches by itself and lets you declare war. In single player you're forced to either accept peace or sit there forever. It's the same in multiplayer but the game has measures to stop you from sitting there forever, which would obviously be worse. They just forgot to program it into forcing peace instead of just closing the diplomacy screen when the window expires. I believe if you try to escape GW diplomacy with the A.I with the B button or whatever it forces peace anyway.

[newsgothic]

You can't catch the AI off guard with a double move.

[Star428]

I agree with newsgothic that it is not a player's responsibility to keep track of what wonders your opponent builds/has. I too have ignored diplomacy in many games when my adversary had the 'Wall' only because i didn't know he had it. Usually, i assume they are x-raying/Adaring or just being annoying when i keep getting multiple requests. Lots of times i miss pop-up notifying me that they get AW. Plus, i don't always know if england is in game even if they do.

I do, however, strongly disagree with newsgothic that the 'double move' is cheating. It adds the element of surprise which is very important in war and this is a wargame after all. To me it makes game much more enjoyable.

[Star428]

double post... sorry.

[Star428]

You can't catch the AI off guard with a double move.

True, but alot of things are different between SP and MP. Specifically, the fact that SP is a true 'turn based strategy game' and MP is not.

[newsgothic]

I do not believe the double move is cheating... just making a point.

[danthechan]

I agree with newsgothic that it is not a player's responsibility to keep track of what wonders your opponent builds/has. I too have ignored diplomacy in many games when my adversary had the 'Wall' only because i didn't know he had it. Usually, i assume they are x-raying/Adaring or just being annoying when i keep getting multiple requests. Lots of times i miss pop-up notifying me that they get AW. Plus, i don't always know if england is in game even if they do.

i agree in part to what you say. i miss all kinds of pop ups during the game. too bad there is not a log to look at to see the past 10 or so notices. we all learn as we continue to play this game. just know going forward that if your opponent keeps diplo requesting you he might have the wall. just talk to him once and if he doesn't have the wall feel free to ignore future requests.
i got the wall yesterday and my german opponent wouldn't talk to me. finally after about 10 requests (during 5-6 turns) he gave in. i immediatly camped his forests and choked him into a small area.

[Star428]

i agree in part to what you say. i miss all kinds of pop ups during the game. too bad there is not a log to look at to see the past 10 or so notices. we all learn as we continue to play this game. just know going forward that if your opponent keeps diplo requesting you he might have the wall. just talk to him once and if he doesn't have the wall feel free to ignore future requests.
i got the wall yesterday and my german opponent wouldn't talk to me. finally after about 10 requests (during 5-6 turns) he gave in. i immediatly camped his forests and choked him into a small area.

I will text them asking them if they have it if i think i have time. But, lots of times i just can't risk takeing the time to message them. When i press ps3 button on controller in order to type a message sometimes it can take up to 3 seconds just to bring up dashboard (or whatever it's called on ps3) then another 10+ seconds to type message. It's even worse if i have to enter the person's id.

[Star428]

Plus, even if they say they have it how do i know they are telling the truth? In ranked play, if it's an unknown opponent i would hesitate to just believe everything my opponent is telling me. If it was someone from the forums or someone on my friends list then yes, of course, i would believe them.

[danthechan]

you don't have to message them, or wonder if they are telling the truth. go to diplomacy and if they have the wall it will say they do. you WILL stand in awe of it.

[GrizzleyTigers4]

Plus, even if they say they have it how do i know they are telling the truth? In ranked play, if it's an unknown opponent i would hesitate to just believe everything my opponent is telling me. If it was someone from the forums or someone on my friends list then yes, of course, i would believe them.

Thats simple.....if they dont have it, it doesnt matter.....accept peace and then try to declare war.....if they have it.....you wont be able to and you will know hes telling the truth......if it does let you declare war then you know your opponent is just an idiot and the game shouldnt take long....

[MultiPlayaBeast]

Looks like I'm in the minority, but I'm going to respectfully disagree.

There are a lot of risks in the game.

My main contention is this: Let's call the double move cheating too—you can't do that in SP.

But I'm not out to make enemies either—I'd rather concede the match and start a new one.

Thats some real talk my friend... There are things in the game not considered cheating but it sometimes make you wonder why this and not that, huh. Double move can be considered cheating as it is intentional running up the clock when everyone else is done and you technically done but you waiting for the clock to give no chance of any player to counter your last move out and next turn you kinda catch them by surprise whomever you double moving. I find that the best way to do the double move without someone blaming you for running up the time is just waiting for everyone to finish there turn and then move your unit as fast as possible, then pressing "b" to end your turn.

This allows you to not have been the one to take long on a turn but you and the other individual who ended turn right before you did. As soon as he ends you make your move and end turn, simple. If the timer reaches the very last 3,2,1 part and the other person hasn't ended yet then you still not looking bad because the other player didn't end and you just waiting to launch the attack. I would comment on the other could be cheats but this one should suffice for a post.

[danthechan]

Double move can be considered cheating as it is intentional running up the clock when everyone else is done and you technically done but you waiting for the clock to give no chance of any player to counter your last move out and next turn you kinda catch them by surprise whomever you double moving. I find that the best way to do the double move without someone blaming you for running up the time is just waiting for everyone to finish there turn and then move your unit as fast as possible, then pressing "b" to end your turn.

i do this too, but frequently it backfires and they restart their turn before the clock runs out. i'm ok with that, i only run it down all the way if i feel it essential to my game. no way it can be considered cheating. its a turn based game. you make your move within the constaints of your turn, then make your next move within the constraints of that turn. running the clock down repeatedly for run of the mill moves does border on unsporting imo.
frankly if you have no scouts out, and can get wrecked by a suprise move, you deserve what you get.

[newsgothic]

MPB: You hacked my quote. I have no problem with the double move (by the way, I like your method). My main contention is that I do not feel I have to respond to diplomacy requests and that this does not constitute cheating.

[Star428]

you don't have to message them, or wonder if they are telling the truth. go to diplomacy and if they have the wall it will say they do. you WILL stand in awe of it.

LOL. Yeah, of course. How embarassing to ask such a stupid question. I feel like an idiot. I wish there was someway to take that stupid question back.

[GrizzleyTigers4]

Just had a GW occurence just now....Duke had the GW against me but attacked one of my cities so he was forced to face the wrath of my knights 2 tiles from his 100g city.....

[REM018]

The problem with the GW is that you do not need to let the diplo screen time out in order to avoid peace. You can just say "I am busy" without any repercussions. And that is the real problem. It is without a doubt obvious what the main effect of the GW is: "It forces your opponents to peace with you". Nothing else is said about what happens after you break the peace. But if u are currently at war and ur opponent gets the GW, you are supposed to be forced to peace. But because of bad implementation, the game does not force you.

Regarding the "some things are considered cheating and others not": We all agree that the game has a lot of flaws. Some of these flaws break obvious, intended game logic (e.g. the GW), some others are side-effects being exploited by people to gain advantages that are not even part of the game design (e.g. freezing). So the argument that game mechanics allow for something to happen is moot. Since they are allowing both, GW glitching and freezing. But one of them is clearly not meant to be in the game at all. The other one is a side-effect that can be circumvented by accepting diplo. When playing the AI it does not have an option to ignore diplo. That is probably why they did not take that into account properly.

But let's not start the whole GW and what is glitching discussion again. There are several threads that discuss this in depth. If you do not want to conjure the wrath of many players out there: If your opponent has the GW, accept peace. After that it is up to interpretation.

[ITZ DENI3D]

Thats some real talk my friend... There are things in the game not considered cheating but it sometimes make you wonder why this and not that, huh. Double move can be considered cheating as it is intentional running up the clock when everyone else is done and you technically done but you waiting for the clock to give no chance of any player to counter your last move out and next turn you kinda catch them by surprise whomever you double moving. I find that the best way to do the double move without someone blaming you for running up the time is just waiting for everyone to finish there turn and then move your unit as fast as possible, then pressing "b" to end your turn.

This allows you to not have been the one to take long on a turn but you and the other individual who ended turn right before you did. As soon as he ends you make your move and end turn, simple. If the timer reaches the very last 3,2,1 part and the other person hasn't ended yet then you still not looking bad because the other player didn't end and you just waiting to launch the attack. I would comment on the other could be cheats but this one should suffice for a post.

This is multi's favorite move lol.

[asmodeios]

So how do you account for the fact if you piss Alexander off enough he will not accept peace when he is in democracy at times?

[REM018]

So how do you account for the fact if you piss Alexander off enough he will not accept peace when he is in democracy at times?

Who are you responding to?

EDIT: I am just going to assume that was a response to my last post.

All I can say to that is that democracy is not the same as the Great Wall. Similar sounding problems, but different. You cannot use strange AI behavior regarding democracy to make a case for ignoring the initial peace request when somebody gets the GW.

[HydroDragon]

So how do you account for the fact if you piss Alexander off enough he will not accept peace when he is in democracy at times?

Yeah but if Alexander pisses you off then you can't do the same back to him. It's just a glitch as far as I'm concerned.

[asmodeios]

So here we are again debating if pressing a button is cheating.

Saying I am busy is not cheating.

[Jackoneill]

You should accept the request for peace, but as most of said you should be allowed to counter for 1 turn.

[ITZ DENI3D]

So here we are again debating if pressing a button is cheating.

Saying I am busy is not cheating.

I agree with this. If it is a forum member I will accept but in regular ranked no way. I'm saying I'm busy not exploiting the game. I am doing what the game allows me to do. Not my fault the developers did such a crappy job of making it.

[ScottieX]

I'm starting to think double moves are good actually - the game is made more lame by the idea that i can attack your cap and you can be guaranteed that you can build a defensive unit. A more realistic scenario might be if it took 2 turns to rush a unit.

[JackHall2003]

So here we are again debating if pressing a button is cheating.

Saying I am busy is not cheating.

I agree with this. If it is a forum member I will accept but in regular ranked no way. I'm saying I'm busy not exploiting the game. I am doing what the game allows me to do. Not my fault the developers did such a crappy job of making it.

We have been over it a million times, obviously people have differing opinions but I suppose it's where you draw your own personal line. As has been pointed out before, the game also allows you to city collapse, obviously not the intended mechanics.

I will grant peace, I don't always expect it though. It annoys me if they don't play as intended.

[REM018]

So here we are again debating if pressing a button is cheating.

Saying I am busy is not cheating.

By your definition anything that the game allows is not cheating. Freezing, city collapsing, barb reward stealing etc. are all OK by your definition. Heck, for some of these you do not even need to press a button. So that can't be cheating, right?

It boggles my mind that skilled players do not want to admit that the GW is broken in MP, but can be handled as if it worked correctly by just accepting peace. The only reason why there is an option to decline diplo is because IMO they thought that u should have an option to not be interrupted while the timer is running. And then get back to it later. I am pretty sure they did not think of it as a permanent mechanism to never engage in diplo with your opponent.

I guess there are either two views on this: Accept that the GW is broken and dont build it (unless you want +3 culture) OR play somebody that is willing to accept peace in that scenario.

The GW is a very powerful wonder (by design). But not overpowered. I think it adds a nice element of unpredictability to the game and it is unfortunate that people can glitch it.

[asmodeios]

In my experience people abuse the GW mechanics when they have it just like @ssholes do to you when you are in democracy and they attack you.
Repeatedly attacking you and then trying to force peace once they finish each turn. Sorry ain't gonna happen.