cheating??

[matt4632]

Ok was this cheating????
I was in a team game online my opponants were egyptian and chinese. I found out that the egyptian city was three squares away from my capital as i explored. They destroyed a barbarian hut that I had just found. I also noticed they had a population of 2 and there city was right by wheat. The Chinese city was three squares away from my partner. They had a veteran warrior army attacking my capital by at least the sixth or seventh turn. Plus I had both of my squares on production the whole time. Is this possible or was he cheating.

[vanchinaman]

Yeah, its definitely possible without cheating - but certainly involved a bit of luck in all probability. Assuming the Chinese start with access to 2 forests - 3 makes it all the more do-able) - they can put all 3 of their population points into production immediately. With two forest +1 city production, that's a warrior every 2 turns, making for a warrior army in 6 turns. If they have 3 forest to start, they get it in 5. That's also assuming they didn't find a goody hut and rush a unit, or a camp that upgraded them to vet for free instead of giving them gold (if it was a vet army, they must have either found a hut and gotten the experience points from defeating the barbs, or found one that gave them the free vet upgrade.

Either way, definitely possible! Were you meaning that you explored with your settler before settling it? Because it's also pretty unlikely that the Egyptian capital would be 3 squares away fro yours as starting positions... impossible, frankly.

[matt4632]

I know it is possible with the chinese but it was the eguyptian that got me not the chinese. He didnt have the hanging gardens wonder so he didnt have 3 population. I still am not sure if its possible if so he got extremely lucky

[matt4632]

ok im just going to go turn by turn on what happend (to the best of my memory) so you can fully take in the bs that i went through. Now that i think about it he probbaly didn't cheat but he got really fing lucky. By the way it was ranked (doesnt matter but whatever)

Turn One placed my city at the starting point. Moved both my units to production trees

Turn Two... wait for warrior to be made

Turn Three... still waiting for warrior

turn four... moved diagonally to the bottom left one square see barb hut

turn five... moved to get on a hill to attack the barb. Once on the hill I see the egyptian capital with a POPULATION OF 2 one square away from my warrior and there warrior unit attacking the barb

Turn six get ready to attack city but am attacked by a warrior unit from his city kills my warrior which is where the vet warrior unit came from. Moved my new warrior diagonally a square and see three warrior units in a line one vet.

Turn seven Army attacks second unit now one turn away from my capital

Turn 8 get a new warrior unit which is killed by their warrior army... London is taken

I LOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now there are a few details that i am not 100% sure of i think i got on the hill because i saw his border and was ready to attack his city. I know for sure that i was beaten by at least the 9 turn at the latest but i am pretty sure that what is above is mostly correct minus a few minor details

[matt4632]

also with what i said before thebes was 3 squares away from london

Beijing (enemy) was three squares away from Tokyo (my partner)
The chinese actually didnt make any army/ units to take out my partner. Because my partner survived much deeper into the game then I did

I am thinking again i dont know if i even got out my third warrior unit thats y i thought it was impossible none the less a frusterating night of games for me

[Grayson]

this is very possible, and happens quite often. Since he was Egypt, he probably moved his settler. He probably found a hut along the way while moving the settler, and he could've also named some squares. He probably settled close to you because he found some gold and knew he could probably warrior rush you.

All he need was the two battles from the hut and the one to kill your warrior. Then all he really needed was a little gold to rush a warrior or two.

there are other ways it can happen.

get used to these types of games on MP. I hate it when civs start right on top of each other. It happens more frequently when there's civs that like to move the settler, like Spain, Zulu, Egypt and Aztec.

basically, if he has gold, he's gonna have the upperhand. No gold and starting next to each other, it's just a crapshoot. It can still be a crapshoot because warrior armies lose all the time to fortified warriors in caps.

Sometimes the first 20 turns of games can just be endless warrior battles back and forth between caps. One civ forms an army and attacks a close cap, loses to a single warrior, which leaves the other cap open, then the other player will form a warrior army and attack the other cap, and can lose, and it can go back and forth. If it lasts more than 10 turns, usually it's just stalemate and both players are gonna have an awful game, because there's usually no place to expand to safely, and huts/barbs will be contested slowly and fiercely. This is my least favorite type of game, because it often doesn't come down to skill, just luck of the draw.

[matt4632]

I knew these games happened and people move their settlers but i have never ran into a rush of an army that quickly and that close he would need 60 gold total to rush like that right?

[Pedal2Metal]

I knew these games happened and people move their settlers but i have never ran into a rush of an army that quickly and that close he would need 60 gold total to rush like that right?

No. If he's 3 spaces away, he only needs 5 turns + 20 gold = warrior army. 3 turns to walk, game over. That's just 1 method, there are several. It's definitely possible w/o cheating. These are the breaks when you're within 5 squares of someone else's capital. Just imagine how bad it is if the other guy was the Aztecs. He can get a walk-in in your capital since you were only 3 squares away.

There's absolutely nothing you can do about this situation. It only happens very rarely (<1-2%) in my experience although it has happened to me also.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[matt4632]

3 turns for his settlers to move? or 3 turn for his army

[Pedal2Metal]

3 turns for his settlers to move? or 3 turn for his army

Either way but I was referring to army. You can make army & move on the 5th turn. Now they are 2 spaces away. 2 turns later, they are in your city. 3rd turn, game over.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[elthrasher]

With some luck and maybe an educated guess or two, any civ can have a warrior army to your capitol inside of 10 turns. Moving your settlers is a high-risk, high-gain strategy. You can luck into a lot of gold and a walk-in or you can get nabbed by barbarians or somebody's warrior (especially Zulu and Aztec).

I have yet to see any sort of credible evidence that people can cheat in ways to give them extra warriors or increased production or something like that. I think most tales of such are simply just someone not understanding that his opponent, by outrageous luck, found two friendly villages and named two tiles to settle with a warchest of 70 gold.

[pjman44]

With some luck and maybe an educated guess or two, any civ can have a warrior army to your capitol inside of 10 turns. Moving your settlers is a high-risk, high-gain strategy. You can luck into a lot of gold and a walk-in or you can get nabbed by barbarians or somebody's warrior (especially Zulu and Aztec).

I have yet to see any sort of credible evidence that people can cheat in ways to give them extra warriors or increased production or something like that. I think most tales of such are simply just someone not understanding that his opponent, by outrageous luck, found two friendly villages and named two tiles to settle with a warchest of 70 gold.

Yeah, the only thing that can really help someone "cheat" is if you end up with a resynch and miss a turn.
That has happened to me before, your units don't move (will heal if necessary) and your opponent gets to carry on as is.
I don't know how to force a resynch so it isn't really cheating just unfair to whoever has to resynch and lose a turn of movement/production.

[matt4632]

well then luck was screwing me over yesterday thanks for all the clarification but at the time i was pissed and baffeled by how fast when i thought about i and heard some comments I fully understand. It was just weird that his cap was close to mine and his partners cap was close to my partner and it was in the same direction. So i was freakin out lol. It sucks when the opponant gets extremely lucky. But hey **** happens