Cheating - Discussion

[DNoved1]

Cheating, more specifically cheating in games, with special focus on BTW.

In this thread I would like to create an open discussion of cheating. Here is the kind of format I would like, feel free to deviate.

• *A quick summary of the method for cheating.
  *Further explanation, if such is felt necessary.
  *Specific reasons for the consideration of such a method as cheating.

Alternatively, you can create a response to such a post as the above, with reference to the post (either quote or link) and counterarguments to specified reasons.

As an example:

Cheating Post

Show

Slabs are cheating in BTW

Slabs (and other "transparent" blocks) prevent spawns, something which normally is only prevented by lighting up an area.

More specific reasons for why this is cheating:

• *Slabs don't require coal, thus skipping the need to acquire this resource.

Response Post

Show

Slabs are cheating in BTW

Slabs don't require coal, thus skipping the need to acquire this resource.

Though slabbing an area does in fact require no coal, and achieves the same effect as lighting an area up, I would like to point out that in most cases using slabs actually requires more resources.

More specifically, one torch can light up an area of 169 square meters on level ground. Admittedly, this is rarely the case, but for the sake of arguement I will continue. Such a torch requires, as resources, one stick and one coal, with a stick being in the worse case equivalent to half a plank. In comparison, slabbing the same area requires 84.5 solid blocks of material, in the easiest case this might be dirt.

The question I suppose is this: would you consider 84.5 blocks of dirt to be cheaper than, and easier to acquire than, one coal and half a plank? 84.5 blocks of dirt is a bit safer, but requires much more time, while a coal and half a plank can be acquired comparatively quickly but with slightly more risk. Also worth considering is the time required to deploy slabs versus a torch.

Ultimately, I would like to say that the greatly increased time requirement outweighs the reduction in risk, and therefore this method shouldn't be considered cheating.

Like I said, feel free to deviate from this format. I just thought it might help keep the discussion constructive.

Edit: and as a side note, please keep the discussion in game, and preferably keep to the game being discussed. It is difficult to compare different games, and as such I'd prefer not to even go there.

[Mud]

There were numerous posts in the topic I believe spawned this one regarding vMC BUD switches and whether or not they're considered cheating;

The popular opinion is that vMC BUD switches allow you to bypass the BTW tech progression and gain access to resources and automation builds earlier than intended, and are thus considered cheating.

The opposing opinion is that vMC BUD switches are not cheating because the most common designs do not rely on any sort of exploit to function. Moreover, they require much more space than the BUDDY Block, forcing you to be more creative and give greater consideration to available space when incorporating a vMC BUD switch into a build, thus offsetting the fact that you can access them earlier on.

:edit: There are more BUD Switch designs than I was aware of, and many do in fact rely on bugs to function.

[Gilberreke]

thus offsetting the fact that you can access them earlier on.

Oh come on, the fact that your build is a few blocks larger is not offsetting the fact that you're skipping the tech tree. Why else would you use a vMC bud? There's no "creativity" involved in exploiting a well-known game bug.

I don't care what you do in your world, it's your game, but don't justify it as being anything else but exploiting the system.

I'm just tired of people suggesting vMC BUDs to other players as being something they'd want to do.

the most common designs do not rely on any sort of exploit to function.

Explain? I haven't seen a single design that doesn't rely on an exploit to detect block updates.

Some posts by FlowerChild:

Spoiler

Show

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7816&p=132876#p132876

Actually, after a cigarette and brief contemplation, what I can say is that I normally break it down into a series of questions along the lines of:

-Does it provide gameplay value that isn't already present, and to what degree (mob traps are a good example here of high gameplay value to an "exploit")?
-Does it bypass existing legit gameplay systems and only serve to make things easier than intended or otherwise interfere with the game flow (piston BUD is an example here)?
-Does it break suspension of disbelief in an overly gamey manner that can not be justified in-game in other ways (piston BUD is example of one that can't, mob traps one that can)?

Where I think the art comes in is in terms of how those various factors weigh against each other in making the end decision as to whether something is an exploit or representative of valuable emergent gameplay, and how far you are willing to go in terms of investing development resources in order to legitimize it (which you'll notice I've done with several features, mob traps and BUDs included). Heck, there's even a certain amount of art involved in evaluating how much it will cost to do that, as it's the kind of thing that can only really be learned through experience.

Spoiler

Show

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8023&p=132786#p132786

why a timer? why not just use a lens, a redstone dust BUD, and a pulse stabilizer, all you need is nether access, a lens, redstone, and some gold (slightly substantial. i find this to be the best use of early game pistons as it's maximum efficiency.

Because that kind of BUD is about as exploity as you can get and I'd never be caught dead using one?

[Crazylemon64]

Way back when, some of the first forays into BUDs used a water source block next to a hole, so when updated, the water would then flow into the hole, lifting a boat off a wooden pressure plate, causing a signal change. This could then be reset with pistons, toggling the signal back to the default state.

Video Link

Video Spoiler

Show

rZUPXs1TZD4

The questionable behavior here is mostly in the update mechanics of the water source block.

[DNoved1]

So then, the objections to BUD switches, as far as I can tell are:

• *They serve a similar/same purpose as another item, which requires further progression in the tech tree.
  *They are based on a bug

Allow me to make some points, which I feel should be considered.

• *They serve a similar/same purpose as another item, which requires further progression in the tech tree.

Spoiler

Show

A BUD block requires anvil technology, gold, and redstone. This is indeed quite far in the tech tree, near the very end in fact. However, a BUD switch requires pistons, unless I am mistaken. There are two methods of obtaining pistons: through crafting, and through raiding jungle temples.

Crafting requires a fair deal of iron, and soul urns, making it fairly deep into the tech tree as well, though not as far as an anvil is. The only step in between, unless I am missing something, is defeating the ender dragon. Depending on your view of the difficulty of this, this may be a big, or a fairly small step (personally I feel at this point the ender dragon is fairly easy, so long as you have ender specs). If we consider this case, it appears that BUD switches are a bit easier to acquire than a BUD block, with a difference of one ender dragon fight.

The other case would be raiding jungle temples. This is a task which is fairly difficult to measure in difficulty due to the many things which affect it. Firstly, there is the plain rarity of finding them. Secondly, there is the jungle spiders, which though difficult are manageable given equipment which can usually be gotten around the time of anvil tech. A third point for this case is that raiding such temples is limited to three pistons per temple, thus severely limiting the usefulness of this method for acquiring any large amount of BUD switches. While this too can be done pre-anvil tech, I feel that jungle spiders are more difficult to manage than an enderdragon when equipped with ender specs.

Given these points, I must agree that using BUD switches does allow the player to acquire functionality which otherwise would require facing the ender dragon. However, this is not to say that BUD switches are vastly easier to use and get than BUD blocks. Overall, I would say that they require only slightly less work, but even that is unfair to say since really they require an entirely different kind of effort.

• *They are based on a bug

Spoiler

Show

Unintended behavior is difficult to describe, in my opinion. Pistons most definitely have unusual behavior, no doubt. At the same time, it is very well accepted behavior, with useful side effects, namely the BUD switch. To frankly dismiss these as a bug (which isn't so much a problem except for the negative connotation) is unfair, I feel. Using the mechanics of the game, especially when they are easily discovered in-game is not what I would consider a bug, but instead using the capabilities of the things I have.

If I may, I'd like to make an analogy. Perhaps I'm a bit off with this one, but consider mob traps. Never intended, and indeed it appears that the creator of the game disliked them and tried to make them no longer functional more than once. However, they are well accepted here, even required practically. The reason? Flowerchild feels they are a good example of building with a purpose (correct me if I'm wrong). What is on one side considered a bug, is considered accepted gameplay on the other. I feel BUD switches are similar. Both are unintended behavior. Both are, in fact, quite useful. And both require effort and a fair bit of planning to use effectively. This is why I don't feel that BUD switches should be classified as a bug, not because they aren't, but because "bug" has negative connotations that I don't feel they deserve.

[FlowerChild]

Hopefully I can draw this short: It's a vanilla bug, unintended behavior, and yes, I do consider using vanilla buds an exploit in order to bypass the tech tree, and as such, to be "cheating".

What you do in your own world is your own business, but please do not try to convince others it's anything other than what it clearly is. You aren't using the game mechanics to create something. You're using unintended bugs within them to do the same.

[Gilberreke]

I'm actually more interested in your reasoning behind defending obsidian generators. I think that might be a more interesting discussion?

Also, in response to the other thread: I don't consider redstone timers to be exploits, though I don't use them myself, because of the plethora of bugs you can run into, using them. A turntable is just way more stable.

[FlowerChild]

I'm actually more interested in your reasoning behind defending obsidian generators. I think that might be a more interesting discussion?

Not much to discuss. They're largely just legacy features given the way the mod has developed over time, and they're not harmful enough to the tech progression for me to consider doing anything about them now. They also have a built in cost associated with them in terms of the redstone dust consumed, that doesn't really make them practical IMO unless you're going for an obsidian aesthetic build or something. In terms of the obsidian actually required by the mod's tech progression, you're probably better off just harvesting it manually.

Same thing with cobble gens, I don't like them, and I never build them myself, but I always have bigger fish to fry than to worry about mass cobble production for aesthetic builds. By the time you can effectively build them, cobble is no longer a resource with any real tech dependency.

These are the kind of details I can worry about more with my own game. In BTW, I just consider them legacy vanilla leftovers with a negligible impact on how it plays.

[DNoved1]

Well then, on the topic of obsidian generators. Lacking any specific points to argue against, I will outline some reasons why they don't feel like a cheat to me.

For clarification, an obsidian generator works around an unusual bug with lava. For some reason, which I don't know the details of, lava flowing into redstone, tripwire (placed string), and possibly other materials turns into obsidian when water is flowing next to it, in a manner similar to the way in which stone generators work.

The reasons I don't consider obsidian generators a cheat are similar to the reasons I don't consider stone generators a cheat. Namely,

• *The resources they generate are cheap and mainly used for building.
  *They require a fair deal of effort to construct.

Stone is used in a lot of recipes, however given the relative ease of acquiring it, especially by the point that a stone generator can be built, makes it what I would consider a cheap resource. Obsidian has even fewer uses than stone, being limited to portals (which require very little of the material), and as a explosion-proof building material. Obsidian has a long harvest time, the longest in fact among natural materials. It is quite common however. The combination of these three factors, with not being very useful and commoness on the one side and harvest time on the other, weigh out to make obsidian a cheap material, in my opinion.

As for them requiring a fair deal of effort to construct, they really aren't too hard to set up, given the materials. At the very least however, generators require a block dispenser, something that in its very creation has a lot of prerequisites (mainly in acquiring the technology to make the materials). Obsidian generators have an additional cost of redstone/string, with string being the likely choice given it's renewability and relative cheapness. If this is the case, obsidian generators will also require a spider mob trap, something you might otherwise not make (at least I wouldn't).

As a side note on the cheapness part, eventually it comes down to stone being a boring chore to mine, if that's your build with it. Same with obsidian, if that's your material of choice. Sure, it's manageable, but eventually there comes a time when you want to build in your world, and without generators that process would be nearly as tedious as it is earlier in the game. As such, I feel generators really reward the delay of building big until later in the game.

[Gilberreke]

Yeah, I wasn't really addressing that to you FlowerChild, should've made that more clear :). I'm not advocating a removal of that bug as it's a big "whatever" in terms of balance, so it doesn't really matter.

What I find interesting is that obviously neither FlowerChild nor I like making one, because it feels "wrong", so I love to see someone explain the reasoning :)

Thanks for writing that up DNoved

One note though FlowerChild, the newer generation of obsidian generators works with string and lava, basically making it renewable and not requiring the more expensive redstone. Not that it matters much of course, especially since redstone isn't THAT rare either :)

[FlowerChild]

One note though FlowerChild, the newer generation of obsidian generators works with string and lava, basically making it renewable and not requiring the more expensive redstone. Not that it matters much of course, especially since redstone isn't THAT rare either :)

Sigh...ok, that's beginning to bug me. Didn't realize string had become a redstone substitute there.

[FlowerChild]

To get back into it, why generators like that bother me, is that it messes with the mining balance (stone in particular). Part of the player incentive to mine is the excess stone that is accumulated in the process, which then can be used in building projects. Obviously, attaining the ores themselves is the primary goal, but the excess stone puts a little extra bonus onto it that makes it more palatable instead of filling your inventory with a junk resource that you can just manufacture at will anyways.

Hence why I don't like it. It's not that I consider it cheating in itself more that I think it diminishes the overall quality level of the game by making mining too narrow in its focus, which decreases the player's overall enjoyment of the game. Hence why I don't do it myself. I appreciate the additional incentive in tunneling and mining in that it also provides me with the materials I need for above ground projects. You may remember me having a design turnaround at a certain point in the past where I began to say things along the lines of "there's no such thing as *just* an aesthetic block", and this is why. A big part of the addictive and fun cycle of MC is the sense that you've "earned" everything that you use in creating your builds. Cobble gens break that feedback loop, and I'd never allow them in my own game for that reason.

If I keep this up though, I'm going to talk myself into doing something about it ;)

[DNoved1]

Something I was thinking of while planning farms on a new world:

You can create a water source block any where (in the horizontal plane).

Not something that's immediately obvious, but it's definitely possible due to how water forms source blocks. Any thoughts on this matter?

[Gilberreke]

Not something that's immediately obvious, but it's definitely possible due to how water forms source blocks. Any thoughts on this matter?

There's plenty of tricks to get water source blocks all over the place in the horizontal plane. All the ones I know require a fair bit of effort though, do you know a simple one?

I don't think it changes the balance of the mod much though, because HC buckets is largely about the vertical plane.

[FlowerChild]

Yup, about the vertical and just getting players to think about channeling water as a resource in the first place for an additional bit of mental stimulation.

Channeling water is fun IMO and encourages building of some kind or another (building being fun as well). The water mechanics still have loop holes aplenty, but that the player is thinking about it at all instead of just placing source blocks is a win.

[Gilberreke]

Channeling water is fun IMO and encourages building of some kind or another (building being fun as well). The water mechanics still have loop holes aplenty, but that the player is thinking about it at all instead of just placing source blocks is a win.

People also seem to forget that while water in MC is loopy and gamey, it's probably one of Notch's better designs. It's simple enough that people can understand why and how it behaves and simple enough programming wise to be workable in a number of ways (performance wise for example). It doesn't feel very "real", but in the gaming sense, it just works. I think that you proved that the placeable source blocks were a mistake, something which others have picked up on too (I think there's at least two other mods restricting buckets in a similar fashion).

On top of that, I think water transportation is one of the more fun aspects of BTW and MC in general. I'm hoping to see some sort of return of that mechanic in RTH, depending on how the water implementation will look.

[FlowerChild]

Yup, I agree with you Gil. One of the thing that bothers me most about modern games in the genre, like 7 days, is how source block placement isn't restricted as winds up feeling extremely exploity (and far less interesting than it could be gameplay wise) as a result.

Some may have picked up on that, but not all.

[DNoved1]

There's plenty of tricks to get water source blocks all over the place in the horizontal plane. All the ones I know require a fair bit of effort though, do you know a simple one?

Haha, no, it requires a fair bit of effort. Surprised to find FC is okay with this, as I am not entirely convinced (and out of the two of us I'd say I find far fewer things to be worthy of being considered exploits).

[Gilberreke]

Some may have picked up on that, but not all.

Which is good for RTH :)

I'm looking at you to be one of the guys to legitimize the genre. Notch made Dune 2, I expect you to go for the Command & Conquer gold :)

(What game would Dune 1 be in that analogy? :D)

[FlowerChild]

I'd say Dwarf Fortress :)

[Gilberreke]

I'd say Dwarf Fortress :)

Haha, nailed it

[erikdk321]

To get back to stone generators. I dont consider them too cheap either, I can defintly see how they take away the value of mining, but at the same time, once you get access to one you have been through a ton of mining already and mining thousands upon thousands of cobble just to get a descent mobtrap in the late game seems off to me. But this is probably one of the things that is up to the player.

[EtherealWrath]

Cobble/Stone machines don't feel as bad as they once did.
Unless I'm mistaken- until you hit the end theres no automatic harvesting of stone.

The obsidian gen feels way off though- with stone its a natural reaction of lava and water, obsidian you're using a glitch in the code to bypass the dangers of harvesting it. (portal networks and beacons use a fair bit of obsidian too)

Water- the best horizontal spread is a square/rectangle lake. It feels like water pooling to fill a gap.
You could go crazy with digging out the coastline to get water anywhere, but you still can't get it up- and using pumps for horizontal spread feels a lot easier than that much digging.

[FlowerChild]

To get back to stone generators. I dont consider them too cheap either, I can defintly see how they take away the value of mining, but at the same time, once you get access to one you have been through a ton of mining already and mining thousands upon thousands of cobble just to get a descent mobtrap in the late game seems off to me. But this is probably one of the things that is up to the player.

That's the point: you don't wind up mining just to build stuff. You wind up mining as part of building stuff. It winds up diversifying your in game activities, and I'd even say encourages building more underground in addition to above (since you naturally accumulate stone while doing so), and on top of that, experimenting with different building materials when you don't just have instant infinite cobble.

Many of you have probably seen my old main world in my videos. Now, think back on it in terms of me having NEVER used a cobble gen to build all that stuff. I also never mined specifically for cobble to build stuff and I don't think I ever came close to running out.

I think those of you that use them may have a severely overinflated sense of how much you "need" them. Like I said above, I don't consider them cheating, but I do think they make the game less fun.

[erikdk321]

Yeah this is defently true, mining does get less important and mining charges and such becomes less important, I really only use them for mob farms and everything else i build with stone.