So the question came up, and I'm curious to general opinion. What is considered "acceptable game tactics" and do they change in tournament play?

Since I've had it come up enough I figure I'll put it out there. Some people say info sharing is wrong. Okay, I can imagine how some people feel it is wrong, and some feel it is even wrong in a major, I can accept that.

Is spoofing a script wrong? Everybody always talks about "people can always get around your script." So is finding ways to defeat someone using a script wrong? Recently I as a CEO was accused of underhanded behavior because some players were running bots, and my corp found ways to take advantage of enemies doing that. To me that says kudos for us, we found away around a script, but the receipients felt it was "underhanded." Bot use is not considered "underhanded" anymore, but taking advantage of it is? Is spoofing someone's saveme to jump to a sector wrong?

I'm curious on general opinion.

Jhereg

I'll sound off. And to the reader, keep in mind that my opinion was solicited, so don't misinterpret these opinions as whining.

I think that information sharing with anyone not in your corp, is mega-corping.
I think that mega-corping is wrong, unless the game rules say otherwise.
I think that bots are great if they help the player play his/her turns.
I think that bots are wrong if they allow others to play (in any way) your turns.
I think scripts of all kinds are fair and acceptable, unless the game rules say otherwise.
I think that exploiting weaknesses in another's scripts is fair and acceptable, notwithstanding my next point:
I think that message spoofing should be banned by consensus, otherwise it will increase to intolerable levels.

+EP+

As a scripter and player I'll add my 2 cents.

Bots have become part of the game, especially in tournaments and other high profile games where coverage is essential. My feelings on bots and turn usage is this: I don't have a problem with another player being able to use a corpies turns with a bot - sometimes its handy like for mega-robs - but if you have to play ALL their turns with a bot then you should really find a new corpie.

But back to the point of "underhanded" abuse. I remember in USO several years ago when an early adj photon script was triggered to cby by a fake deployed fig trigger. It was pretty funny at the time and now most scripts have some form of other of spoof checking. Some auto-kill scripts can be beat by faked ship names or hails and the same goes for a few reloaders. I think that just about every "automated" script has some type of hole that could be exploited. If you don't want the risk then don't use the script its that simple -- or when a glitch is discovered work with the author to fix it. Its the responsiblity of the script user of a bot, or any other type of script for that matter, to use it wisely. If you have to rely on a bot to play the game while your away then be prepared for others to try and break it while your gone. People try to spoof reloaders, auto-reconnect scripts, attack scripts, I don't see how spoofing a bot is any different.

On a different note, I will agree with EP that private information sharing is mega-corping. But blowing a port in a specific sector or making posts in the game logs may be a lame tatics but are not really mega-corping as everyone in the game is exposed to the information.

The unfortunate part of your post Jhereg, is that many of the issues you raise are for the most part, nearly impossible to control. I mean let’s be perfectly honest, this game is based solely on the Honor system. The game is only a level playing field if all of the players are playing within the rules. How do you prove info sharing? You can’t, it's as difficult to prove as a headache. Because there are rules that can't actually be enforced internally by the game then there will always be speculation of cheating. Cheaters and Sysops that abuse their power are vehemently persecuted in these same forums regularly because they have chosen to ignore the one in-tangible rule that binds us all, and that is honor
I for one believe that unless it is clearly understood prior to a game that mega-corping is tolerated, then any sharing of information OUTSIDE of your own corp could be considered "Cheating". It's very simple and basic in its purest form, do not discuss anything outside of your corp that may in any way hinder or change the outcome of a game for another corp.
On the topic of "beating another’s script" I think EP has said all that needs to be said in his final two points.

Zoso

Wow, EP. Pretty much hit the nail on the head. There is only one area where I (partially) disagree with you. You said:
quote:I think that bots are wrong if they allow others to play (in any way) your turns.
"In any way" is a little harsh, IMHO. Is it wrong to use a corpie's bot to have him megga rob if he ran to the bathroom/to get food/whatever? I feel that is perfectly acceptable to control a botted player at times. Personally, I don't care if my corpies have my bot do a buydown or not, I don't see that as being a problem. But like RammaR said, if you are playing ALL (or even a significant portion) of a player's turns through the bot, then there is a problem.

One other point I'd like to make is about spoofing. A bug is usually defined as an error or defect in software that causes a program to malfunction. Who here would agree that it is OK to use a bug in TW? Not many. Bug use is cheating, I think we can all agree on that. So if it is cheating to use a bug in TW, how could it be OK to use a bug in someone's script? Vulnerability to a spoof is clearly a bug in the code of the script, as it causes the script to function in a way or at a time it is not meant to. If you run a buggy script and it CBYs you or otherwise harms you, go cry about it. You ran the script, its your problem. But someone else taking advantage of bugs to spoof you? Definately not OK in my book.

Info sharing is megga-corping, unless you share it with all players. So, telling C2 where C3's base is located is megga-corping if you don't also tell C4 and C5. I'm not saying that it's wrong...just that I feel it's megga-corping. In a game where the sysop says no megga-corping, then you shouldn't do it. But if you blow up a port in an enemies base, I wouldn't call that megga-corping, since you were sharing that info with everyone. Blabing an enemies base location over fed is a real grey area, since it's possible that some of the other players might miss your announcement. Better to just post it in the logs. Then you can be sure that everyone has a reasonable opportunity to see the info. It's in poor taste perhaps, but I wouldn't call it breaking the rules, since everyone has the potential to benefit from it. (except the guys who's base location you just disclosed, but, as so many peeps keep saying...it's TradeWARS.)

I don't like bots. I don't like bots that allow your corpies to run your turns. If I could ban them I would. But they are now a staple of modern TW tactics, and they aren't going away. People have lives, and sometimes it's just easier when you are running your turns to just have a corpie fire up a bot to help you out, rather than spend tons of time telling them what you want them to do. Saves time and coordination. I agree with the above posters that if you are running all your corpies turns, that you should probably find a new corpie. I wrote an SDT script that basically controlled the Blue's and both the Reds turns. The Reds would log in, fire up the scrpt, and then step away from the KB; they were literally done for the night once their script started running. The blue script furbed, told the reds which ships to use, tracked busts, and cloak-towed them when the reds were done. Is the blue running their turns? Is that a Bot? Donno. I wouldn't call it a bot, since it wasn't really interactive. But some peeps DID call it a bot. Anyway, bots are here to stay, and I say just frigging deal with them.

Which brings me to my next point, which is...one of the best ways of dealing with them is to spoof/break them. I think it's totally fair to screw with somone elses bots. Any time you fire up any script, you are taking the risk that something will go horribly wrong. If you are going to trust in your scripts and be AFK, then you should realize that there are real risks in doing that. If you don't want to take those kinds of risks, then you shouldn't bloody well fire up a bot.

Normally, I'd never disagree with Traitor. His website has been of IMMENSE help to both me and the TW community at large. Its fair to say that (by proxy) he taught me most of what I know about TW.

But I can't stay silent on this issue. Bug use is cheating. Period. Whether the bug lies in TW or the script is irrelevant. This is NOT an excuse for poor code. If the script on its own kills you, its your problem. Use better written scripts or learn to write your own. If your script is stupid and can be faked out by macro retreating or something along those lines, too bad. Again, use better written scripts or learn to write your own. But spoofing is different, and there is a big difference between outsmarting and spoofing. Outsmarting puts the script into a situation that exceeds it's logic structure. In other words, it doesn't know how the handle the situation. Using in game techniques to outsmart a script is clever and even admirable. Using techniques like giving ships names that are macros or sending bogus Fedcomms/hails uses outside techniques. Does the game allow you to do it? Certainly. But the game never intended for one player to cause another to CBY based purely off of ship names or off of Fedcomms/hails. That is the difference. Retreating off of a fighter is a tactic that was programmed into the game. Macros just make it happen faster. This is a valid tactic, spoofing is not.

And for those who say that everyone knows there are risks to AFK scripts, that is true. I don't see that as being a relevant argument for the acceptability of spoofing. There is an important distinction between running a photon script while AFK and it getting faked out (and getting you killed in the process) and it being spoofed. One is using game knowledge and game techniques to outsmart a script, the other is using items (such as ship names or comms) that are clearly designed for non-combat purposes to CBY or otherwise harm another player. By that argument, it would be perfectly acceptable for me to write a backdoor CBY macro into a script and widely distribute it in .cts form. Then I could CBY anyone running that script, and it would be their fault for running it, right?

You are correct Psion. That would be their fault for running it. You would probably get a name like i seeem to have now for doing something like that, since tricking a script is no longer acceptable. But it is not cheating.

That being said, I don't personally see anything wrong with tricking scripts by doing such things, because it takes WAY less time to check that than it does to check 99% of other things in a script. But i accept that many players feel the tactic is no longer valid, I personally have my opinions as to why, but that is just my opinion.

So, for the record, i will not be using "fed, hails, SS" in games in the future, short of the corp using it on me.

So you're saying that I could give out sabotaged scripts in .cts format so no one could look inside and verify the code. Then I could use the backdoor trigger to cause them to CBY, and it would be THEIR bad, not mine?!?!?!?! I hope thats not what you're saying, because from my POV thats a pretty ludicrous argument.

Psion, I'm gonna have to disagree that spoofing a script is "bug" use on the same order of say the photon fed bug in previous twgs versions. When trying to spoof a script you're not trying to "break it" - but force it to respond exactly how it was written to. It might be a safety oversight in the script that allows for it, but its not a "bug" because its doing exactly what it was written to do. I could argue that it took game knowledge and techniques to come up with the idea of renaming a ship in order to "outsmart" it into cby'ing. For a long time its been a technique to try and beat dock killer scripts to buy a ship named "xxxx lifts from stardock" --- I've never seen any rants or raves over that technique, not even when the script then powers up on Capt'n Z and pods the script user. I think this is getting so much attention because it was done in a "major" game and to an already controversial script - a bot. But ship naming techniques have been around for a long time.

I am saying in my opinion it would be very underhanded, but there are no guarantees with scripts. I think it is lame to do, but people don't have to use a public script it is a choice. And a show of trust of the author.

Jhereg

Psion,
quote:His website has been of IMMENSE help to both me and the TW community at large. Its fair to say that (by proxy) he taught me most of what I know about TW
You are welcome. Now, without letting tempers flare...
quote:Originally posted by Psion
Bug use is cheating. Period. Whether the bug lies in TW or the script is irrelevant.

I disagree. Well...before one of my many detractors blows a fuse, let me clarify: Exploiting bugs within the TWGS or TW program is cheating. Script bugs are different from game bugs. If you were AT KEYS and not using a script, then you wouldn't get blown up (or whatever). No matter what the heck I named my ship or planet. Or what I sent you over fed. Scripts are not an inherent part of the game, they are merely tools. You are not REQUIRED to use them. If someone figures out how to fake out your script, you don't HAVE to use it.
quote:
This is NOT an excuse for poor code.

Yes it is. Any script that doesn't take into consideration the possibility of spoofing is either poorly written, or the script writer is willing to take the risks that their script might be spoofed or broken.
quote:
And for those who say that everyone knows there are risks to AFK scripts, that is true. I don't see that as being a relevant argument for the acceptability of spoofing.

Again, I disagree. You could play the entire game without using a single script. Not using scripts makes you immune to script spoofing. (Although it's probably necessary to use scripts in modern TW to WIN, but that's a different arguement...)
quote:
Then I could CBY anyone running that script, and it would be their fault for running it, right?

Yes. It's been done. And, if memory serves, one script writer wrote an attack script that wouldn't let you attack the script writer.

When you use someone elses *.cts scripts, you had better either totally trust them, or be prepared to get bitten by any easter eggs they decide to put in. Fortunately, 99.9% of the public scripts are written without such surprises.

Caveat Emptor, baby!

(edit)
p.s. for what it's worth, all of the scripts I've ever made public have been in plain text. Encryption stifles inovation.

Ok I’ll give my .02

This is a hard one for me because I have had someone spoof my SS, call saveme, and photon my entire corp. in a game.
When disusing this with the person who spoofed our SS it came to this we took the chance by using the script we left the script running therefore we accepted the possibility of the script being used ageist us or the possibility of a bug being exploited in the script and used ageist us.

Does this fact suck, yes!

Would I do the same if I had abilities or knowledge to do it to someone, probability not.

Scripts are a buyer beware item if you use them you accept that there might be a bug that will get you killed.

Otherwise I almost completely agree with what EP wrote.

In general, I feel that tricking a script is perfectly legitimate. Since scripts are just that - scripts. They save us time and effort, and grant us speed and efficiency which we wouldnt have if playing by keys - but the tradeoff is that they may be succeptible to tactics that a human mind would not. That's a tradeoff every script user should acknowledge and be OK with, especially since in general scripts are more of a boon than a burden.

However, most scripts these days - as Ram said - have basic to elaborate spoof protection. 5-6 years ago, a simple clever use of hail might be enough to send someone flying. Now more... um... drastic measures are often required to effectively spoof a script. The more drastic these measures get, the easier it is for someone to cry foul.

Take a reloader, for example. From the spoof-ed user's perspective, they may see pages and pages of logs of the spoof-er operating under a name like "is powering up weapons" landing and lifting endlessly from a planet named somethin akin to "Shipboard Computers.. destroys 9999 fighters". While I dont feel its cheating, it definitely don't look or smell too clean.

My feeling is that if people want gameplay to smell minty fresh at all times, then they should take into account competitive TW's mercenary attitude ("do whatever unless its explicitly prohibited") - and establish rules regardin these tactics beforehand.

quote:Originally posted by typh00n
My feeling is that if people want gameplay to smell minty fresh at all times, then they should take into account competitive TW's mercenary attitude ("do whatever unless its explicitly prohibited") - and establish rules regardin these tactics beforehand.

New Improved TW! Now with Mint-Y-Script (tm)! heh. That'll be the frigging day.