fil512 / stratinit

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/stratinit
0 stars 0 forks source link

"Friend" and Cede exploit (all players) #23

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
It is possible for Player 1 to be Friendly with Player 2 and be at war with 
their ally (Player 3).  Suggest this should not be possilbe.  What is currently 
happening is that the "Friend" (Payer 2) will move troops into Player 1's 
territory (bypassing all defences) and then cede them to player 3, who will 
attack.

Possible ideas are:
1)not being able to Cede units when within "X" number of spaces of a friendly 
player also/or once units are ceded they are "held" for 12 hours and their MP 
is returned to the starting number for the unit at the end of 12hrs. 
2)Not allowing Friendly status with the ally of someone with whom you are at 
war.
3) Terminating Friendly status (after a delay of 24(?) hours if you go to war 
with a Friendlies ally.

Open to options here as long at the exploit is halted.  Thanks.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by peaceful...@hotmail.com on 24 May 2011 at 2:08

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
This should be the highest priority...

Original comment by peaceful...@hotmail.com on 24 May 2011 at 2:10

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
The easiest thing for me to do here is when diplomatic state with Nation X 
changes to war, if diplomatic state with ally(ies) of nation X are > neutral, 
reduce it to neutral.

I'll make that change now.

Original comment by khstev...@gmail.com on 27 May 2011 at 2:03

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Hmm tricker than I first thought.  Friendly -> neutral normally requires timer. 
 Seems like there are two possibilities here.  Say I'm friendly with A and 
neutral with B.  Say I declare war on B.  One of two things should happen:
1) war should be delayed 24 hours so I avoid being in a state where I'm 
friendly with one and war with the other.
2) I should instantly go to neutral with A.

I don't like either option, but option B seems preferable to option A.

Original comment by khstev...@gmail.com on 27 May 2011 at 3:38

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I've gone with #2.  It feels more realistic.  Here's the new logic:

When your relation with nation X changes (either instantly, or after a timer), 
then if your new relation with X is worse than neutral (i.e. WAR) then for each 
ally A of X:
  if A's relation to you is better than NEUTRAL it will be instantly reduced to NEUTRAL
  if your relation to A is better than NEUTRAL it will be instantly reduced to NEUTRAL

Original comment by khstev...@gmail.com on 27 May 2011 at 4:12

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Half-fixed in 1.1.39.
Should be completely fixed in 1.1.40

Original comment by khstev...@gmail.com on 7 Jun 2011 at 3:19