Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All

Author Topic: is consulting a simulator cheating?  (Read 28987 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rabid

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Shuffle iT Username: Rabid
  • Respect: +643
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #50 on: December 14, 2011, 09:04:45 am »
0

For the record I am anti outside influence during the game. (if it was enforceable)
And have not done so in the past.

But as you say pragmatic, and as such believe any competitive rules must be enforceable.
For example I wonder how many people have been "cheated" out of going first in the current event?
Do you ask your opponent to log off / on before starting the match in case they lost their last game?
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #51 on: December 14, 2011, 09:41:47 am »
+1

It's important to keep in mind that there is no pre-defined absolute morality about how you play a game, besides the rules. It's defined by the community that plays that game. Which is of course what's going on in this thread, but there's no reason to point fingers and say "you retroactive cheater!" about how someone played before the discussion.

There's no pre-defined absolute morality about anything outside of community mores. Yet people are still going to have moral reactions to things. There are certain things that seem so plainly outside the norms that waffling on them and trying to say "well, I guess that wasn't explicitly outside the rules, so you're an okay guy but let's not do that going forward" seems weird. Dominion's rules do not have anything in them about internet play. Isotropic's FAQ does not have anything about disconnecting your opponent in order to win, or taking 5 seconds less than the disconnection threshold every move to get your opponent to quit, or snooping on their machine to see what they have in their hand. I think a reaction of "hmm, maybe we should have been more explicit about that" to any of those things is comical.

The simulator issue is definitely different from those things. But I would say norms from other mental games are pretty clearly against unannounced external assistance. And it's clear from Geronimoo's original post that he thought there may be an issue (although I think his later posts in this thread where he tries to walk this back suggest he really didn't expect anybody to say "yes, that's cheating," which again, weird.) Thus I think my reaction is pretty reasonable.

It may well be that at some point people decide "sure, let's all do this" and it becomes a commonplace. I wouldn't like that very much, I don't think, but then it would have a different status. Your example of poker is a place where that happened - there was a lot of debate about HUDs and database software at first, and then eventually there was an agreement among serious players that they would be allowed. I always found them to be against the spirit of the game, but past a certain point it was hard to claim that they were cheating given the evolved norms. That said, the first person to use one on their own with nobody else knowing about it was cheating, at the time, even by your definition - terms of service were almost always written in a way that it was tough to interpret that software as kosher.
Logged

Octo

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #52 on: December 14, 2011, 01:57:25 pm »
+1

@Rabid - well, many people may have been cheated by that, which is another of the various reasons why iso cannot be truly competitive.

Suppose we were to go with your suggestion though, this changes the nature of the game quite drastically: The time-out-kick feature is NOT part of official Dominion rules and no time limit is set in the game, and thus I'm allowed to ponder the opening tableau as long as I want. If simulators are allowed then I must also by extension be allowed to simulate for as long as I want on any turn.

How do you reconcile this change? Would you concede that a game like that is altogether quite a different rule-set and skill-set to some extent than face-to-face dominion?

If you would not change the time-limit rules, then how would reconcile the fact that you are allowed to do something by the rules, yet a new extra rule has to be created to stop you doing it too much? (The amount of time would definitely have to be explicitly stated so you know how much time you have each turn.)

Lastly: there would have to be clear notification that simulators are allowed and where to get hold of them in the rules too (again, this is assuming you want fair competition) - it's not fair to say "oh, you didn't pick up the huge tennis rackets rather than the piddly little ones? yeeah, they were round the back somewhere, didn't anyone tell you about them? We've all got ours! Good luck!"
« Last Edit: December 14, 2011, 01:59:45 pm by Octo »
Logged

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
  • Respect: +609
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #53 on: December 14, 2011, 05:03:41 pm »
0

I find this thread fascinating and may use it as the basis of a paper in an ethics class that is coming up next semester--we will see if there is something I can apply it to.

For my two cents: I am not a hardcore player like many on here, I suppose I am more casual and as a result less competitive--also not as good. As such I have never used a simulator, nor do I think I ever will, even outside of play. For this reason, I could be considered one of the unsuspecting players on Isotropic that could get slammed by someone using a simulator--I would also probably get slammed by them even if they weren't using it. And to be honest I wouldn't really mind. The fact that this person is willing to spend the time and effort to learn how to use a simulator, be good enough to use it fast enough before the time constraint ran out and know how to use the results that the simulator spits out is impressive.

However, I can see the point from players more competitive than I were such an advantage may be upsetting and a true advantage over another great player.

Is this cheating? I don't think so. What is cheating? Is it unethical? Probably. But then again what is ethics?
Logged

rspeer

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 469
  • Respect: +877
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #54 on: December 15, 2011, 05:11:50 am »
0

This thread has gotten pretty weird, I think.

The reasonable conclusion is "don't simulate during a Dominion game". I hope the suggestion of "what if everyone simulates during Dominion games" is just a thought experiment. This is a card game, not a programming competition.

The role of computers in Dominion is to find out cool things about strategies. In particular, cool things that can be shared with other players, making the game deeper. I hear there's even a forum for that.

The advantage you might get from having run a few simulations yourself (outside the game!) is nowhere near the advantage of reading this forum daily.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #55 on: December 15, 2011, 06:32:11 am »
0

"The advantage you might get from having run a few simulations yourself (outside the game!) is nowhere near the advantage of reading this forum daily."

This is probably true for most of us, but I definitely don't think it's true for the couple of players who are already very strong and are quickly becoming super strong with the aid of simulators (Geronimoo, WW, DG I think? etc). If you use the simulators efficiently and spend some time with them, I think they're a tremendeously powerful tool.

Unless "reading the Simulation forum" counts as reading the forum and not using simulators I guess.. but that seems like a silly distinction :p
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #56 on: December 15, 2011, 06:56:15 am »
+1

Isotropic's FAQ does not have anything about disconnecting your opponent in order to win, or taking 5 seconds less than the disconnection threshold every move to get your opponent to quit, or snooping on their machine to see what they have in their hand. I think a reaction of "hmm, maybe we should have been more explicit about that" to any of those things is comical.


Force disconnecting an opponent isn't really winning the game of Dominion, it's simply destroying it.  That seems like hacking rather than cheating.  The meatworld analog would be pouring gasoline over all the cards and burning the entire game in between turn 8 and turn 9.  The response isn't, "you cheated", it's "wtf".  It's clearly unethical the same way it's unethical for me to steal your bank account number but it's not cheating in the sense of gaining an unfair, unallowed advantage in a game.  No one won or lost, the game was destroyed.  Whether that unfairly manipulates iso's ranking system isn't dominion cheating, it's elo manipulation cheating, which is not what this thread is about.

Taking 5 seconds less than the disconnection threshhold repeatedly isn't cheating, it's just being a dick.  It doesn't give you an unfair advantage, if I took a bit too much Nyquil before I played my Isodom tournament game and took that same amount of time to think about every move naturally I would enjoy that same advantage. 

Snooping on someone's machine to see their hand is viewing information that is defined by Dominion's rules to be private information, so it is explicitly cheating. 


I think simulating is pretty gray.  And I kinda think it's sad that Donald and everyone else responded the way they did.  I'm most interested by games that can't be played well by a computer, and within those games, the aspects that can't be played well by a computer.  And Gerominoo made the simulator himself.

It's kinda like when I was in high school.  I had a TI-84 calculator, and I knew how to program it.  I had a Statistics class that let me do whatever I wanted with it, and another math class that restricted me to a four function calculator when I had tests to take.  In the statistics class I learned the concepts and programmed z-test process and t-test processes into my calculator and I knew what they did and when the test came it was actually mostly word problems, but I knew where the tools I had made were and how to use them and what they meant and I made A's.  Some of my classmates used the programs I had made (please note that I consider this complex ethical moral etc stuff and I'm not sure if letting my classmates was ethical in my metaphor) and most of the time they didn't understand how to interpret the results or what the program was doing so they made C's anyway.  Which was rightful, the point of the class was to understand statistics, to potentially use it in the career field.  I could clone that TI 84 and give it to a company but they wouldn't pay me 50,000$ a year to use it, because the formulas aren't the skill of value here, it's the understanding.  If the point of that statistics class was to prepare me for potentially being a statistician, then I could very well bring that same TI 84 calculator to wherever I worked and use those same programs (yes I would forget how to use them.  But you forget everything you learn in high school, that's just how life is) to do whatever application they had.

In the other math class we went over the concept and the proofs for the material and even heard the names of some of the jolly mathematicians and talked about how this or that formula is really good in a particular kind of physics problem.  Then we got the test and it was a departmentwide thing that teacher hadn't written himself, and it had straightforward questions that just required you to remember tedious formulas.

In the first class the thing of value and interest was tested and the computation that didn't matter could be removed.  In the second class there was effort and desire for me to learn things of value, but the test didn't reflect it, and even if it did I could have been inhibited by thingss that didn't matter so much.


It does depend on what you value in the game, it's beauty in the eye of the beholder.  Almost everyone I hear from is more fascinated with engine games or interactive attack based games than when one guy won because he guessed that Vault BM would beat Envoy BM.  So if both people are using simulators I think that just cuts some of the unfun stuff out of the game and leaves in stuff people like.  I guess that's not really an ethical assessment, it's more of a, idealistic thing, about what the rules should be versus what they are.  I don't really know whether Geronimoo should have instinctively know he was acting against the communities unspoken rules.  I was just upset by Donald's post and the sentiment that using a simulator destroys the game or makes it uglier.  Deep Blue can win at chess but computers have a much harder time winning at go, and many would contend go is a more beautiful game.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #57 on: December 15, 2011, 07:04:19 am »
0

I don't understand your last couple sentences. Simulators can win at Dominion, does that mean simulators make Dominion a more beautiful game? As far as I can tell, that doesn't mesh with your last sentence, which to me implies the games computers CAN'T win at are more beautiful.

Feel free to use Deep Blue (or Rybka, Houdini, Fritz, etc as chess engines are called these days) when practicing/studying though. Just don't fire up Houdini when playing a game of chess against another (unknowing) human.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #58 on: December 15, 2011, 07:29:56 am »
0

It is late where I am, I shouldn't be on forums.

I meant better games are the ones computers can't play well.

And as I mentioned, I broke into ideals rather than ethics, it's really about what players have agreed to.
Logged

Octo

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #59 on: December 15, 2011, 08:25:04 am »
0

I see your point, in so much as you value skills that can't be automated over those that can and think they make for a more enjoyable, worthwhile game, and so in using simulators we're cutting the fat and trimming it down to its essence.

However, what we can and can't automate changes as we make breakthroughs. So was chess more beautiful before Deep Blue? If a computer is made that can play Go does Go become less beautiful as a result?

If your answer is yes, then it also follows that simulators had/have the same effect on Dominion.
If your answer is no, then how do you account for the period before before Deep Blue when we didn't know you could automate stuff? Some games are innately mechanical, but with others it's not so obvious. To think "that's not as beautiful because a machine will be able to do that......eventually" is a bit odd.

(this thread is getting super weird btw)
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 08:30:07 am by Octo »
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1490
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #60 on: December 15, 2011, 08:43:07 am »
0

If your answer is yes, then it also follows that simulators had/have the same effect on Dominion.

We shouldn't overrate what the sims can do at the moment. You can test which of two to three relatively simple strategies is dominant. Where either all playrules are defaulted (Geronimoo), or you could with some effort change them if you before the game consider how you would play which card in which situation in this setup. We don't even have anything that sees a board and says which BM-engine is dominante (which maybe would be possible, but not very interesting), let alone supported BM or a "real" engine. Automatic tuning of playrules is even more impossible. And I don't see that happening in the near future...
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #61 on: December 15, 2011, 09:27:04 am »
+1

I see your point, in so much as you value skills that can't be automated over those that can and think they make for a more enjoyable, worthwhile game, and so in using simulators we're cutting the fat and trimming it down to its essence.

However, what we can and can't automate changes as we make breakthroughs. So was chess more beautiful before Deep Blue? If a computer is made that can play Go does Go become less beautiful as a result?

If your answer is yes, then it also follows that simulators had/have the same effect on Dominion.
If your answer is no, then how do you account for the period before before Deep Blue when we didn't know you could automate stuff? Some games are innately mechanical, but with others it's not so obvious. To think "that's not as beautiful because a machine will be able to do that......eventually" is a bit odd.

(this thread is getting super weird btw)

The computer that plays Go well will by necessity have to be a more complex computer than the one that plays Chess.  So no, it doesn't change whether Go is beautiful, the computer's ability to play it is just a barometer.

Ultimately eventually a computer will be able to play anything.  But I can write a computer that always wins tic-tac-toe in maybe 200 lines, while it would take me far more effort to do the same for checkers.  (I figure checkers is probably crackable, but I don't really know).  Using that as a barometer I expect I'd find checkers more interesting than tic-tac-toe, and, in fact, I do.

So if computers pick between Mine and JoaT really easily, I hope the dominion design challenge winners aren't similar to Mine/JoaT.  And if they are Mine/JoaT anyway, I would be happy to watch both of them use a simulator to choose between Mine and JoaT, and see the game hinge on whether a cleverly timed Brigand or good Inn manipulation wins the game instead.  (those might be kind of contrived, unlikely examples, but JoaT is kind of a killjoy for varying strategy so yeah..)
Logged

Karrow

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +7
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #62 on: December 15, 2011, 12:24:27 pm »
0

I think the depth of this discussion is quite confusing as I find the matter very simple.  It's like scrabble & a dictionary.  For official scrabble tournament rules, you can not use a dictionary during play, it can only be used to resolve a challenge.

For Scrabble, there are word finding cheater programs online.  Referring to a simulator while playing Dominion online is just like using a dictionary or word-finder program in Scrabble online.  It's wrong, it's cheating, but you will always run into people that do it.  Just because you can't prevent someone from using a word-finder doesn't mean you integrate it into the online game itself.

To claim that using a simulator for training is cheating is insane.  That would be like claiming that anyone who ever used a dictionary or word finder for training is a cheater in Scrabble.  Using a word-finder for training in Scrabble may seem helpful, but in the long run for most people it just makes them dependent on the word-finder.  And I think the same is true in Dominion.  One who uses a simulator too much is going to have a very limited vision.  There are a lot of situations and cards that the simulator can not handle yet, and simulator Big Money +X is garbage as soon as there's an attack in the kingdom.

« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 12:29:11 pm by Karrow »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25671
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #63 on: December 15, 2011, 02:28:05 pm »
0

I think simulating is pretty gray.  And I kinda think it's sad that Donald and everyone else responded the way they did.
So, you're saying you think it's important that people be able to have a computer play some of their turns for them, without telling their opponents? You disagree with the concept of letting your opponent know that this thing they might not want is what they're getting. I mean, I am trying to see how else to disagree with my post.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #64 on: December 15, 2011, 04:56:34 pm »
0

No, you're right about that, it's not right to use a simulator during a game.

I just saw it more as a stealing a pencil rather than stealing a Rolex
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #65 on: December 15, 2011, 05:56:07 pm »
+2

"The advantage you might get from having run a few simulations yourself (outside the game!) is nowhere near the advantage of reading this forum daily."

This is probably true for most of us, but I definitely don't think it's true for the couple of players who are already very strong and are quickly becoming super strong with the aid of simulators (Geronimoo, WW, DG I think? etc). If you use the simulators efficiently and spend some time with them, I think they're a tremendeously powerful tool.

Unless "reading the Simulation forum" counts as reading the forum and not using simulators I guess.. but that seems like a silly distinction :p
FWIW, I don't think the simulator has helped me that much, except in a) saving some time on analyses; b) talking to other people about strategies (this is the biggie).

Quote from: popsofctown
I just saw it more as a stealing a pencil rather than stealing a Rolex
Uh, they're basically the same thing?

Also, the whole "there's no morality, just what the community says" thing is really, really wrong. There is indeed objective morality. Whether the use of sims falls significantly into the realm of what that morality describes is another question.

biopower

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #66 on: December 15, 2011, 10:51:20 pm »
0

Also, the whole "there's no morality, just what the community says" thing is really, really wrong. There is indeed objective morality.

This probably applies.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #67 on: December 15, 2011, 11:35:37 pm »
0

Also, the whole "there's no morality, just what the community says" thing is really, really wrong. There is indeed objective morality.

This probably applies.
In that it's grossly wrong?

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: is consulting a simulator cheating?
« Reply #68 on: December 16, 2011, 09:18:17 am »
0

Hooray for digressions.

Also, the whole "there's no morality, just what the community says" thing is really, really wrong. There is indeed objective morality.

There are a couple of interpretations of this I could agree with: modulo a few psychopaths, moral sense is universal; we can come up with a core set of ideas that are effectively held by consensus among all people. Some norms have evolved to be hugely successful at facilitating human cooperation. But I think that universal core is quite limited, and I also bet that neither of those interpretations are what you mean by "objective." If there is objective morality, then what is the objective argument for its existence?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All
 

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 21 queries.