momuuu wrote:a) A bug is not per definition a cheat. This is actually a fact, if you care to look it up. b) Saying that "alt-d breaks balance is a fact" is beyond ridiculous. It affects balance, but it doesn't break it in any regard. Even the argument that some civs have better explorers is pure nonsense, because those explorers also give extra xp. c) Whenever you mention that alt-d shouldn't necessarily be considered a cheat, there are somehow a bunch of people that will claim, with no good arguments, that it's silly to say such a thing.
I just don't know what to say anymore. People need to revisit logic school.
momuuu wrote:a) A bug is not per definition a cheat. This is actually a fact, if you care to look it up. b) Saying that "alt-d breaks balance is a fact" is beyond ridiculous. It affects balance, but it doesn't break it in any regard. Even the argument that some civs have better explorers is pure nonsense, because those explorers also give extra xp. c) Whenever you mention that alt-d shouldn't necessarily be considered a cheat, there are somehow a bunch of people that will claim, with no good arguments, that it's silly to say such a thing.
I just don't know what to say anymore. People need to revisit logic school.
Posting for the first time in like a year to nitpick this particular post and say this doesn't have anything to do with logic lol
momuuu wrote:a) A bug is not per definition a cheat. This is actually a fact, if you care to look it up. b) Saying that "alt-d breaks balance is a fact" is beyond ridiculous. It affects balance, but it doesn't break it in any regard. Even the argument that some civs have better explorers is pure nonsense, because those explorers also give extra xp. c) Whenever you mention that alt-d shouldn't necessarily be considered a cheat, there are somehow a bunch of people that will claim, with no good arguments, that it's silly to say such a thing.
I just don't know what to say anymore. People need to revisit logic school.
Posting for the first time in like a year to nitpick this particular post and say this doesn't have anything to do with logic lol
momuuu wrote:a) A bug is not per definition a cheat. This is actually a fact, if you care to look it up. b) Saying that "alt-d breaks balance is a fact" is beyond ridiculous. It affects balance, but it doesn't break it in any regard. Even the argument that some civs have better explorers is pure nonsense, because those explorers also give extra xp. c) Whenever you mention that alt-d shouldn't necessarily be considered a cheat, there are somehow a bunch of people that will claim, with no good arguments, that it's silly to say such a thing.
I just don't know what to say anymore. People need to revisit logic school.
Do you really want a debate to know if we should allow alt d or not or do you just want to break our balls ? I tend to think it's option 2. Btw did you know I won vs tit @princeofkabul ?
momuuu wrote:a) A bug is not per definition a cheat. This is actually a fact, if you care to look it up. b) Saying that "alt-d breaks balance is a fact" is beyond ridiculous. It affects balance, but it doesn't break it in any regard. Even the argument that some civs have better explorers is pure nonsense, because those explorers also give extra xp. c) Whenever you mention that alt-d shouldn't necessarily be considered a cheat, there are somehow a bunch of people that will claim, with no good arguments, that it's silly to say such a thing.
I just don't know what to say anymore. People need to revisit logic school.
Do you really want a debate to know if we should allow alt d or not or do you just want to break our balls ? I tend to think it's option 2. Btw did you know I won vs tit @princeofkabul ?
I wanna kick you in the balls cuz you're an otto lamer
krichk wrote:For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge Challenger_Marco
Something like building rotate however, that's a cheat. The developers saw how OP it could be depending on what civ you are and decided to disable it in the final version of the game.
A post not made is a post given away
A slushie a day keeps the refill thread at bay
Jackson Pollock was the best poster to ever to post on these forums
lol, this discussion again? I thought it was already clear to everyone that it is possible to abuse the bug to get unfair advantages in a game. Well I guess it is not. Examples: building tps with no VS lost; building shrines; building tc without the ransom alert before the explorer would be able to be revived, extra dogs/disciples, etc etc
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
Chess has explicit rules while aoe3 does not, so your comparison is faulty.
macacoalbino wrote:lol, this discussion again? I thought it was already clear to everyone that it is possible to abuse the bug to get unfair advantages in a game. Well I guess it is not. Examples: building tps with no VS lost; building shrines; building tc without the ransom alert before the explorer would be able to be revived, extra dogs/disciples, etc etc
Except the advantage isn't actually unfair since both sides can use the bug. It is only unfair if it is a cheat. Your argument here thusbis that it is a cheat because it is unfair because it is a cheat.
And this is why its useful to discuss it again. Aoe3 people are sheeps, they repeat what the rest is saying without understanding it. The only reason alt-d is considered a cheat is because a large group of people dislikes it and is vocal about it.
Both sides can use the bug, but not necessarily both sides can gain the same advantage out of it. For instance, a revived Iroquois warchief can be a powerboost to the army, whereas a British explorer can be irrelevant. Is the Indian rush the same without the 2 monks, opposed to a dead Russian explorer?
It might not be a cheat, but it sure is a bug exploit. Maybe not on the same level as the firepit bug and double deck bug (which were quite bannable), but you have to draw a line somewhere for competitive play. It is also an easily avoidable exploit, i.e. once you know it exists, it is 100% possible to avoid doing it by accident (ok maybe it is possible by accident, but, still, mostly avoidable). You kind of have to do it intentionally for it to happen. On the other hand aztec/china cover mode exploit is a slightly lesser bug exploit because it can happen by accident (and indeed in the course of using standard game mechanics to gain an advantage) and undoing the exploit, while possible, takes a few seconds (i.e. effort).
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
Chess has explicit rules while aoe3 does not, so your comparison is faulty.
Sure it does, but doing something that is omitted from the rules is not breaking them.
Aoe doesn't have rules because the rules are implied by what is possible and generally "expected". If you could get a tuck tuck tuck by holding ctrl shift alt f6 it would go against the expectations and implied rules.
My question was rather about the fact that just because both can do it, is it not cheating?
If literally everyone did it however, it starts becoming the expectations again, and probably isn't considered cheating
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
Yes it is, how is it related to the topic though?
Just the fact that just because anyone can do it without modifying the code or adding some plugin, it doesn't mean it can't be considered a cheat.
BrookG wrote:Both sides can use the bug, but not necessarily both sides can gain the same advantage out of it. For instance, a revived Iroquois warchief can be a powerboost to the army, whereas a British explorer can be irrelevant. Is the Indian rush the same without the 2 monks, opposed to a dead Russian explorer?
It's the same with things in aoe3. For instance, Germany can abuse the pull trick almost every game, while brit or Russia you're hardly going to have the opportunity to exploit it. We've had this discussion a lot of times, and the conclusion is that pull trick is fine because it's a nice mechanic according to the people who host the tourneys, while alt D isn't.
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
If literally everyone did it however, it starts becoming the expectations again, and probably isn't considered cheating
Yes, that's the point. A bug doesn't have to be a cheat.
BrookG wrote:Both sides can use the bug, but not necessarily both sides can gain the same advantage out of it. For instance, a revived Iroquois warchief can be a powerboost to the army, whereas a British explorer can be irrelevant. Is the Indian rush the same without the 2 monks, opposed to a dead Russian explorer?
It's the same with things in aoe3. For instance, Germany can abuse the pull trick almost every game, while brit or Russia you're hardly going to have the opportunity to exploit it. We've had this discussion a lot of times, and the conclusion is that pull trick is fine because it's a nice mechanic according to the people who host the tourneys, while alt D isn't.
Because there is a degree of microing skill behind it compared to pressing a hotkey combination.
91 wrote:Is it cheat if I put back a chess piece on the board after its been beaten? Does it make a difference if my opponent sees it and could also do it?
Yes it is, how is it related to the topic though?
Just the fact that just because anyone can do it without modifying the code or adding some plugin, it doesn't mean it can't be considered a cheat.
Well, there are rules in chess, and by doing that you would break it. Likewise, you could punch your opponent till he resigns or do whatever you want, but it's cheating since it goes against the rules. I get your "expectation" argument, but again this "expectation" is subjective and there's no rule that says that alt d is cheating.