Yes, you're not imagining things! The new patch has arrived, and so we are planning the first Civ4 SGOTM. Gyathaar has been fine-tuning a challenging scenario for you, in his own inimitable style.

A SGOTM is a Succession Game, played as a competition between multiple teams. We provide a common starting save and a simple objective, and a system for uploading and downloading your saves, and recording team progress, as the game passes from player to player in each team.

For players unfamiliar with the concept of a Succession Game, you can find information here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=14235). We have been running the Civ3 SGOTMs for a couple of years, and you can see how that works by visiting the Civ3 equivalent (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=118) of this forum. The progress and results pages for all nine Civ3 SGOTMs to date are here (http://gotm.civfanatics.net/submit/sgotm_submission_list.php).

We'll open a sign-up thread for SGOTM 01 in a few days, so please use the above links to do your homework, watch the main Civ4 GOTM forum for announcements, and come back to sign up for a team.

Please feel free to use this thread to discuss the SGOTM format, and to ask your questions or make (polite) suggestions for its future evolution.

Awesome, I can't wait!

Very interesting, I've already read something :)

How can we make a team?
Another question (sorry, I'm a total nooob)
I've noticed several threads concerning the same sgotm, for each team. I suppose -better to state the obvious...- that it isn't allowed to read the thread except of the own team, isn't it?

Very interesting, I've already read something :)

How can we make a team?
This link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134688) will take you to SGOTM09's sign up thread for Civ 3. It will explain how it has been done in the past.

Another question (sorry, I'm a total nooob)
I've noticed several threads concerning the same sgotm, for each team. I suppose -better to state the obvious...- that it isn't allowed to read the thread except of the own team, isn't it?
That is correct. :) It is a competition after all. :D No reading the other team threads... :nono:

Once you have completed the game and submitted it and posted in the Final Spoiler Thread, your team is allowed to read the other threads. :clap:

Finally time to go pick up a civ4 copy then. And no better place to learn the ins and outs of the game than an SGOTM! :)

@staff: :worship: :worship:

Very interesting, I've already read something :)

How can we make a team?
Single players who sign up will be put into teams we hope will work together.

If you know a group of people that want to play together then you'll be able to sign up as a ready-made team, or part-team. Maybe there are players you have already played a Succession game or a Play By Email with, or people you have got to know during other CFC activities, or even people you met at another site.

I've noticed several threads concerning the same sgotm, for each team. I suppose -better to state the obvious...- that it isn't allowed to read the thread except of the own team, isn't it? That's correct. Each team is given its own thread to discuss the game and post turn logs. Players must not read other team threads until the game is over, as other teams may find solutions to problems that give them a competitive advantage. This can't be enforced by thread logins, because SGOTMs are a spectator sport, but we do watch actively for players reading other team threads.

Um cool, this looks like fun.

hahaha! looking forward to it!

will be a big change fro the civ 3 SGOTM but i think i speak for everyone when i say we are ready for the challenge

I have been thinking of running the game in 2 difficulties.. and the teams get to pick which version they play..
For this game it would be one noble and one emperor version.
The alternative would be that everyone plays monarch (or perhaps prince).

What does you potential players think about this? Would need to decide on this before the signups starts :)

I've added a poll to gauge player feedback on what range(s) of difficulty levels are preferred. Please select all that apply to you.

i'm in .

Thx for the answers Alan and Leif :)
The difference in time (I'm italian, GMT+1, and you all GMT-5 I think) maybe could be a problem for a team?
Probably I'll look for european people and other italians http://civilizationitalia.forumfree.net/ :)

Well - are there enough staff around to resurrect the staff team? If not, I'm interested in joining a team. :)

Thx for the answers Alan and Leif :)
The difference in time (I'm italian, GMT+1, and you all GMT-5 I think) maybe could be a problem for a team?
Probably I'll look for european people and other italians http://civilizationitalia.forumfree.net/ :)
I think you'll find the SGOTM teams in Civ3 came from across the globe. Before I took on the admin for those games I was on the Xteam - with Leif, as it happens. I'm in the UK time zone, and we had Americans and Scandinavians on the team at various times.

have a look at the team threads. The normal sequence is a 72 hour cycle from one player to the next, and teams have a hard time maintaining even that pace, regardless of their geography, so time zones are not a problem.

You can make timezones work in your favour if you want a fast turn-round. A sequence of Europe/US east coast/US West coast/Australasia can theoretically play four turn-sets in 24 hours.

However, it's a team game, and you may need the extra time to ensure that all team members have a chance to comment on the situation between turn-sets.

But if you do form an Italian team, please remember that you should use this forum for your team communications, and that you should use the English language. As I say, this is also a spectator sport, and the standard language of CFC is English :)

Roger Alan, I'll try an international team, more fun :)

Sounds great. Played (and playing) in a few SG's but never played in a GOTM. Seems like a great idea. I'll have to work on a few of my SG team-mates to form up a team.

On difficulty level, I have never even played above monarch myself or in an SG so I will pick Monarch as the level.

Just as an FYI, myself and IglooDude are looking for 1 or 2 libertarian minded peoples to form a themed team

Mmmm. This looks so interesting - but with what time? What kind of time does playing this take up each turn for someone on a team - I've never done it, and really have no concept of what time commitment you'd be making to be part of a team.

Maybe I could lurk around a game and then play #2?

I have learnt from the Civ3 SGOTM never to be afraid of playing a game at a higher level than I'm used to. What can be achieved in a succession game can be far more than can be achieved individually, so I would be happy to take the plunge on any level. Unfortunately, even with 1.61 I can see any floodplains in unexplored regions of the map, so that excludes me from any competitive Civ4 game :sad:

I would recommend anyone thinking of giving it a go to dive on in for the first one and not wait for the second. Have a look at the Civ 3 SGOTM or Civ4 succession game forum if you want to find out what it's like.

I shall have to satisfy myself with lurking this one.

I have been thinking of running the game in 2 difficulties.. and the teams get to pick which version they play..
For this game it would be one noble and one emperor version.
The alternative would be that everyone plays monarch (or perhaps prince).

What does you potential players think about this? Would need to decide on this before the signups starts :)
I agree with Furiey that in Succession Games a higher difficulty level can be played successfully by a team than going solo. :)

However, if the difficulty will scare some folks off who haven't played, a two tier game for the first few games may be a good idea. I think this would also depend upon how many experienced folks want to play and if they can be spread around.

For max participation, two difficulty levels may be the way to go. The games will not be comparable, but you've run, essentially, 2 competitions in one with C3C and Vanilla and PTW.

What about those of us who are weaker Civ players than the average GOTM player? Is there a mechanism to put weaker players together (which I'm guessng would result in a weak performance) or to balance them with stronger players? I mean, I finished in something like the bottom 20 or 30 of GOTM3 and expect a similar placing in 4 and 5 - i can imagine it would be pretty frustrating for an experienced player to take over after I've messed things up for 20 turns.

What about those of us who are weaker Civ players than the average GOTM player? Is there a mechanism to put weaker players together (which I'm guessng would result in a weak performance) or to balance them with stronger players? I mean, I finished in something like the bottom 20 or 30 of GOTM3 and expect a similar placing in 4 and 5 - i can imagine it would be pretty frustrating for an experienced player to take over after I've messed things up for 20 turns.
The first player usually plays 20 turns and then each player, in succession, plays 10 turns. Before you play, the team generally discusses the next 10 turns. After that discussion, I think each player has a pretty good idea what to accomplish and what to watch for. If, during your turns, you run into something that trips you up, you can stop, save, and ask the team what they think and they will help you to proceed. So, you are never alone and I have found that it is difficult to mess things up too bad, although I have tried at times! :mischief:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

While I am hardly an upper half player, only when lucky, the teammates I have played with have always been pretty tolerant and always are helpful. :cool:

I think the poll is kind of silly. Like Furiey said, a team game can be so much better played than a solo game, so a high-level game could be really fun in SGOTM. But if the deal was to play Warlord, I'd be just as happy to play that, since the real fun is to out-perform the other teams :p. Thus I clicked all the alternatives.

i voted for prince... seems just over the average... and it would be a challenge to some, and produce some great games and compitition

I agree with Leif and Furiey. A Noble game would be absurdly easy. Furthermore, no one seems to be particularly interested in either Noble or Emperor. I suggest a single game at Monarch.

@juballs. Prince would be ok too.

I think the poll is kind of silly.
Thanks! Have you read the varied responses to recent game difficulty levels in the solo GOTM competition? We have people who refuse to take part in anything above Noble because they don't feel capable of handling it. We have others who refuse to get out of bed for anything less than Monarch because it will be too boring for them. We are attempting to make this an *inclusive* competition. Why is it "silly" to ask players what they are prepared to sign up for before, and to encourage debate of this kind, before we decide on one or more game difficulty levels?
Like Furiey said, a team game can be so much better played than a solo game, so a high-level game could be really fun in SGOTM. Sure. And that should be taken into account by people responding to the question. A SG is a real opportunity to learn how to survive and prosper at higher levels than one is comfortable with at solo level.

But if the deal was to play Warlord, I'd be just as happy to play that, since the real fun is to out-perform the other teams :p. Thus I clicked all the alternatives.You may feel that, but check out some of the other player reactions to the recent Warlord game.

Thanks! Have you read the varied responses to recent game difficulty levels in the solo GOTM competition? We have people who refuse to take part in anything above Noble because they don't feel capable of handling it. We have others who refuse to get out of bed for anything less than Monarch because it will be too boring for them. We are attempting to make this an *inclusive* competition. Why is it "silly" to ask players what they are prepared to sign up for before, and to encourage debate of this kind, before we decide on one or more game difficulty levels?
:eek: Whoa, sorry, didn't mean to offend in any way. :whiteflag: (did I perhaps touch a nerve? :mischief:)

I should rephrase myself - I've read (and balked at) the threads you mention and I realise that this is a real problem. But I truly, honestly think that people with those kinds of issues are silly. So I shouldn't have said that the poll itself was silly, rather that it reflects a silly situation created by silly people. That's my opinion anyway, feel free to differ.

But also, those threads deal with solo games - in a succession game things are vastly different! People not comfortable with playing solo at a higher difficulty level should (yes, should, again IMO :p) be thrilled at a chance to play a more difficult game together with more skilled players, for the best learning experience they could imagine. I've been there myself, and I've seen it happen to others. And those scorning the lower levels should recall that when it comes to a SGOTM, things are seldom what they seem and the real difficulty doesn't lie in the in-game difficulty level. And that's what makes those games extra fun.

In any case, it was never my intention to disagree with the way you guys are running the show. I think you are doing a tremendous job, I'm sure you have thought of all these ins and outs already, and if you feel that a poll like this is in order then you're probably right. I'm just frustrated that people can't see the bigger picture, which is what leads to this situation in the first place (and from your strong reaction, do I dare suggest that maybe you guys are too...? ;))

Btw, I should also note that me clicking all alternatives was not due to the presumed "sillyness" of the poll, but rather an honest answer to the question what level I would participate at.

Peace, and keep up the good work. :thumbsup:

did I perhaps touch a nerve?
No, not an exposed nerve. I freely admit to doing silly things from time to time, sometimes deliberately, often accidentally, but I didn't feel this one justified the description.

There's a whole learning curve for lots of players to climb before they reach your understanding of the opportunities. Until they do, simple things like the "difficulty" level of the game can be a turn-off. I don't want to put off the *hundreds* of new players we have attracted here if I can avoid it.

After thinking some more on this, and since you wanted to encourage a debate on these issues, I have a few comments and suggestions. This time I expect people to disagree with me, which I didn't before. ;)

First of all, this time I would actually want to question the poll itself, despite my earlier claims of not wanting to. If read correctly, and more specifically if people answered the given question correctly, it would surely give you some useful information. Unfortunately I doubt that's the case, I bet a lot of the voters (dare I say most?) are answering a completely different question - "What difficulty level(s) would you like to play the game at?". I base this claim both on the responses in this thread, and the look of the graph above - it's way to sharp! When the time comes to say yes or no, I would be surprised if (m)any of the players already flocking to this forum would actually turn down the game regardless of difficulty level.
I'm not saying this makes the poll less useful to you (well, maybe some), just that you should take care how you interpret the results. But I guess you had that one figured out already.

Second, I realise that the question of what difficulty level I would *like* to play at is highly dependent on the game. It would have been really silly to play the SGOTM7 AWD game at Monarch level, and the current SGOTM9 Indian Space Race would have been a very different (IMO less enjoyable) game if played at Deity. So, *my* actual answer to any such question would be - "whatever level you guys think is best". In other words, I don't think this is a question for the players, since you staff guys are both much wiser, and more knowledgable about the game at hand.

Third, do you really have to use the difficulty level as a sales argument? I know I may be far out here :), but couldn't you simply omit the difficulty level from the sign-up thread? And replace it with some "Words of Wisdom" (tm) about how little effect the difficulty level really has and how the players should trust you to pick a suitable level? And then don't reveal what it actually is until the game starts?
Nah, I guess that wouldn't work, people just don't take kindly to being told how to think :rolleyes:.

But perhaps a more concrete suggestion, if you decide to run at a lower level, you might stress that this is "No Ordinary Game" (tm) to keep the higher-level players interested. Though I think that would be solved automatically when they/we get to read what kind of twisted plot you've come up with this time... ;) :worship:

Feel free to disagree with me, the discussion might even lead to something. :D

Hmmm - those results are looking pretty close to a normal distribution.

Count me in as one of those who are up for anything. Myself, I voted for Emperor difficulty since I have trouble at that level and hope that the SGOTM will help improve my game. Still, I'd like to give it a go regardless of the difficulty level. Thanks to the staff for running SGOTM (and GOTM!) - it really makes civIV a heckuva lot more enjoyable for me.

Hmmm - those results are looking pretty close to a normal distribution.
That may end up as the conclusion, in which case our original guess at Monarch wasn't far off. However, we have had over 80 players in a Civ3 SGOTM, and the total responses for this poll are still only half of that level. I wonder if we have not yet heard from the bulk of the potential audience, and if those might skew the distribution ... or not ;).

@AlanH + Dolphin

The result may look normal but I submit that it is not, at least not in terms of ability. A normal curve around Civ4 players would probably be centered on Warlord. On this forum you don't see the entire bottom side of the curve. Most of the players here are better than average. Therefore they represent the right side of the curve. The left simply is not there.

I think that the reason why so many chose Monarch and Prince is because people were allowed multiple choice. Take me. I'm a Prince-to-Monarch level player. As such, I'd really like to play in an Emperor game in order to learn something. OTOH, I would also be willing to play the levels I'm comfortable with. So I checked all three. A Noble player might well check Prince and Monarch as well using similar reasoning. A diety player might tolerate monarch in order to teach us lesser mortals and a warlord player might be ready to try Prince.

If you had asked for a single preferred level, the distribution would probably have been truly normal. The left side would likely be clipped off because of the assymetrical distribution of CF abilities. I agree with the staff that Monarch is probably the right level.

OTOH, if this game is to be another Gyathaar Special (TM). none of us have any business chosing the level except him. :lol:

Looks very seductive. I'd like be in if manage to run civ 4. Tell me please about version everybody play now, AFAIK it was 2 or 3 "upgrades" to cancel exploites... BTW, Communism looks very powerful in civ 4, what about it?
I prefer harder level, but may play monarch and above.

OTOH, if this game is to be another Gyathaar Special (TM). none of us have any business chosing the level except him. :lol:
Well.. I could always just make the game warlord difficulty.. but make it play as hard as emperor :mischief:

Hmmm.... Reminds me of a Warlord CIV III game I started quite recently. :mischief: Only one difference: normally when I play emperor, I am ahead when I enter the IA. In that one I was still behind. :eek:

I think I'd be interested in this. Didn't ever give the Civ3 SGOTM a try, but...why nt Civ4, eh. I voted emperor, which is where I felt extremely challenged in Civ3. Not familiar enough w/ Civ4 yet, but I'm sure someone out there can carry me. ;)

I've learned a lot about Civ III from lurking the SGOTM's. I wouldn't mind a more hands-on approach to learning Civ IV.

Would love to give this a try. I'm really trying to improve my game, need to learn how to/when to war for the better of my civ. I'm too much of a builder.

Voted Monarch, as that's the level I win 1/2 the time on now...

I voted warlord to monarch as warlord I can win easily but not well, pretty much same goes for noble, and at prince and above I would probably learn a lot. Above monarch I'd just be terrified to do anything.

How do I register a team for SGOTM?

We'll open a Sign-up thread in a day or three, along with the game parameters and a set of rules and objectives.

Just to get less surprises later.. can you potential players test if you can open this save?

Its just a randomly generated duel size map save, not related to the SGOTM at all.

I just want to see if all the problems with protected saves that we had in an earlier GOTM was properly fixed in patch 1.61 :)

I can open it just fine :).

I voted before reading the thread and my thoughts were pretty similar to Niklas'.
I checked all boxes except 'higher'. I've never won an emperor game yet and only win around 1/3 of starts on monarch.
Even though sgotms really lift my game, I'm thinking that on higher difficulty levels than emperor, I won't contribute much. I like the challenge of playing above my own usual standard in sgotms, but I wouldn't like playing if I'm the only poor player on a team. Nor would I like to go into a sgotm on immortal or diety with players of my calibre :scared: :hammer2: :suicide:
Apart from that, I don't mind if the difficulty level is 'easy' or 'hard'. Main thing is trying to :hammer: the other teams [pimp]

@Gyathaar - The test game opened fine for me as well.

@Gyathaar - The test game opened fine for me as well.
Ok.. good :)

Since two people has opened it with no problems, I am now mostly interested in if someone are unable to open it :)

I've posted the Reference Thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=168439) giving the structure of the competition, and rules and guidelines for players. There are a couple of links to submission management pages that are not yet active. These will be set up during the time between now and the start of the game. The sign up thread is coming soon ...

Just a word of caution regarding the difficulty.

In Civ3 SG's would surely make the 'felt' difficulty 1 or 2 levels less. In Civ4 however, SG's are harder than SP games due to the multitude of directions one can play a game. A good team will surely be able to cope on higher levels, but the standard SG teams will suffer. That's what we experienced so far and that's why quite a few of the SG veterans abstain SG's for now.

I suggest to have team with no more than 5 (better 4 ) dedicated members. A disenchanted player can really 'harm' the game's progress. Be warned ;)

In Civ4 however, SG's are harder than SP games due to the multitude of directions one can play a game. A good team will surely be able to cope on higher levels, but the standard SG teams will suffer.I disagree to a certain extent with you on this. I definitely feel much happier playing a higher level in a SG than in my SP games. We (my SG teams) seem to achieve a lot more simply because we pause every 10 shots and discuss what to do next.

This may be because I am below the SG average skill and am being pulled up and a player of higher than average skill will similarly be pulled down. I think this may be a genuine phenomenon but outweighed by the advantages.

In Civ3 SG's would surely make the 'felt' difficulty 1 or 2 levels less.Never played in a Civ3 SG so can't offer a comparison.

EDIT: not sure how I got the trade-route sign in the title bar but it's best just ignored. [Deleted it - AlanH :)]

Gyathaar has posted the Sign-up thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=168438) for Civ4 SGOTM 01. Please make sure you register your interest there, even if you have posted here, as that thread will provide the definitive list of contestants that we'll assign to teams.

This sounds like fun. I would love to be in.

Just a question - I've taken a look at a few SGs and players generally seem to get the save, play all their turns, and then report back. Is it also normal practice to interrupt your turns and consult if something unexpected comes up, and is that allowed in the SGOTM?

Just a question - I've taken a look at a few SGs and players generally seem to get the save, play all their turns, and then report back. Is it also normal practice to interrupt your turns and consult if something unexpected comes up, and is that allowed in the SGOTM?
It's your call, individually and as a team.

Normally a team will delegate total control to the current player for the duration of his/her turn set. However, if you think your team mates might be able to offer a different perspective on the situation then, sure, stop and ask for input. If you are confident that you can handle the situation that's arisen and can explain your actions to the team, then keep playing.

It's your call, individually and as a team.

Normally a team will delegate total control to the current player for the duration of his/her turn set. However, if you think your team mates might be able to offer a different perspective on the situation then, sure, stop and ask for input. If you are confident that you can handle the situation that's arisen and can explain your actions to the team, then keep playing.

OK, thanks for clearing that up.

Draft Team Lists for SGOTM 01 are posted in the Sign-up thread. Please check them out and give me feedback on any changes you require as soon as possible.

How will Warlords affect SG2? Should folks that intend to play in this upcoming SG hold off on installing warlords?

I am reliably informed that installing Warlords will still leave you able to play vanilla Civ4. You get a separate .exe.

Many thanks for the info AlanH.

Hello :)

It looks like the last game started in Nov/Dec - I'm wondering if there is any way to predict when the next one will be coming?

Also, will all games be played in vanilla/warlords like SGOTM3 or is that something that was special for that game?

Thanks!

This one was probably unique in having both versions on the same map. The intention was to see how the two versions play relative to one another.

We are planning the next game right now, hopefully to start this month. It will be Warlords only, and the next will be Vanilla only. This pattern will then continue, and the alternate games are intended to overlap.

Looks like the SGOTMs have taken about 3 months each to complete, so four per year under the current system.

In the proposed overlapping games approach, do you envision something like 3 or 4 each of vanilla and warlords? So a team might start a warlords game in Feb and then start a vanilla game in April while still finishing the warlords game (next warlords would start in June, etc.)? A game every 2 months alternating would be 3 of each per year.

With a team potentially playing two games at once, they would still have a separate thread for each game I assume? Would have to, since when a thread can legally be viewed will be different for the two games. And I suppose team membership may differ between the two games.

dV

First of all, the teams between warlords and vanilla could and would differ much.

Looks like the SGOTMs have taken about 3 months each to complete, so four per year under the current system.

In the proposed overlapping games approach, do you envision something like 3 or 4 each of vanilla and warlords? So a team might start a warlords game in Feb and then start a vanilla game in April while still finishing the warlords game (next warlords would start in June, etc.)? A game every 2 months alternating would be 3 of each per year.

With a team potentially playing two games at once, they would still have a separate thread for each game I assume? Would have to, since when a thread can legally be viewed will be different for the two games. And I suppose team membership may differ between the two games.

dV
Nothing changes ...

The teams will be independently staffed for each game, as they are now, with independent threads. Some players don't have Warlords, some won't play Vanilla, some won't want to be involved in overlapping games.

Each separate team will have its own thread for a game. Players will have to restrict their posts on any one game to that game thread, and not discuss any game in progress in the wrong thread.

Frequency will probably be as fluid as it has always been.

The sign up thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=205978) for SGOTM 4 is now open for business.

We have created a separate subforum for Warlords SGOTMs (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=247) to reduce the chances of opening the wrong thread if you are playing vanilla and warlords games at the same time.

Are SGOTM 3 & 4 going to be released?

SGOTM 3, 4 and 5 have all been played, finished and the results were published. We are currently signing up for SGOTM 6.

See my signature for links to the Progress and Results page for the finished games, and for a link to the new Warlords game sign-up thread.

Sorry I guess my question was confusing. Are the world builder saves going to become available for SGOTM 3 & 4 (and 5 too now that it is done)

Right now the links don't work from the download page.

Where is sign-up for SGOTM6? I see the SWOTM6 signup in the other forum, but no sign-up here for vanilla :confused:

Where is sign-up for SGOTM6? I see the SWOTM6 signup in the other forum, but no sign-up here for vanilla :confused:
Hi,
SGOTM06 is a Warlords game, there is not a Vanilla version. You can sign up here. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=252883)

Sadly I don't have Warlords (just Vanilla & BtS) :(

@Trynthlas, I just checked ebay, you can own it for about $10.00US.

Coolies :)

I'll probably wait and see what the next SGOTM is, as the next month is fairly poor as far as time for me to play in a SG (see signature for why ;))

Sorry I guess my question was confusing. That's one way of putting it :p

Are the world builder saves going to become available for SGOTM 3 & 4 (and 5 too now that it is done)

Right now the links don't work from the download page.

Thanks. I've fixed them. My work on preparing for BoTMs introduced a buglet :blush:

Hi,
SGOTM06 is a Warlords game, there is not a Vanilla version. You can sign up here. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=252883)

Is this a trend here? I'm just becoming to really start to get more active with Civ 4, and have only recently discovered the GOTMs and G Minors and G Majors. Came to check out the Succession games, and see if it interested me, only to find out I can't even take part.

I've pondered BTS, recently. But, I haven't even mastered Prince in vanilla. So, I hesitate. Plus, I've read of many glitches and problems.

But, if the Succession games, etc, are going to start going to Warlords and BTS, and vanilla is going to get left behind, I guess I'm wondering if I have no choice but to jump on board.

By the way....if you have BTS, does that enable Warlorlds games, as well as BTS games? I know Warlords was included, but I'm not sure if you could do the WOTM and the new BOTM, and the regular GOTM.

If that's the case, maybe I'll drop the dime.

I'm sure we shall continue to support vanilla at some level, if only because there are some players who have never buy the expansions for some reason. This SGOTM is Warlords because the last one was vanilla. It would probably have been Beyond the Sword, but I figured I'd rather let the monthly GOTMs debug BtS and the related HoF Mod, rather than commit a three-to-four month SGOTM to it.

But remember that Civ4 vanilla was the first version at this level. If you want the game Sid *intended* to ship, you probably need the expansions.

If you only buy the Beyond the Sword expansion, it will not install Warlords. Someone recently reported buying Civ4 + Beyond the Sword from Direct2Drive, and it costs an arm and a leg - and it doesn't include Warlords - so buyer beware!

However, there are plenty of good deals out there. Having virtually given up on ever seeing the full Mac conversions, I figured I'd better get the Windows games, so I recently bought Civ4 Complete. It includes vanilla plus both Warlords and BtS expansions, all at the latest version numbers, on a single DVD. It was well under $30 UK equivalent from play.com, delivered free in a couple of days.

I recommend starting to edit your Christmas Wish List. :)

@billybgame, try ebay, I just saw warlords there for $10US.

Ok guys...thanks. Maybe I'll seek those out. Not sure if I should go the Complete route, or Warlords and BTS seperately. Maybe that Complete deal sounds the best, if I can find comparable prices. As long as you can keep the games with separate installs and executables somehow. So, you can choose to play whichever one you choose? Although, I hope that wouldn't get too confusing, going from version to version.

Edit: Weird....is Complete only available retail in foreign countries, or something? Ebay resulted in nothing but foreign seller results.

Edit 2: Checked out Play.com.....36.34 in dollars. Not too good a deal, especially when I already have vanilla. And, I'm not sure they ship to US for free. Perhaps the separate expansions are the way to go.

Complete installs the three games in exactly the same way as if you bought them separately. They are playable as three separate executables, with three separate desktop shortcuts. There's only one DVD, and when you insert it the Autoplay screen starts up BtS if you tell it to Play, but you can just cancel the DVD Autoplay and double click on of the desktop icons to start up the version you want.

I read here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=14235 about training games with an expert analysing the play of noobies. Is there anything like that planned for the near future? I would very much like to try it out.

Hi, welcome. :wavey:

This forum is specifically about the Civ4 SGOTM Competition games. We don't run Training Day Games (TDGs) here. If and when Civ4 TDGs are run, they would normally be found in the Civ4 Succession Games (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=168) forum. Why not ask in the Registration thread in that forum?