View Full Version : Patch Hold for TSG11


leif erikson
Apr 15, 2011, 09:58 PM
I think that TSG11 will be delayed while we await the next patch. It looks quite extensive.

Was thinking about a culture game next.
The question is whether we should play with, or without, policy saving.

I can see where holding policies is sacrificing something to gain something more later, thus part of the planning needed for speedy victory. However, I could be convinced otherwise by a well thought out and reasoned argument. :)

DaveMcW
Apr 16, 2011, 11:51 AM
It's not much of a sacrifice. Hoarding almost all culture until Cristo Redentor is the optimal strategy.

leif erikson
Apr 16, 2011, 11:57 AM
:hmm: Are you saying then that it is more of an exploit?

Stefanskantine
Apr 16, 2011, 04:55 PM
I'm in favor of NO policy saving. Saving till Redentor isn't really fun and doesn't seem in keeping with the intent of the game design.

MadDjinn
Apr 16, 2011, 09:56 PM
Or or, here me out here:

allow policy saving and see what the relative turns/win work out to for save vs. no save.

Oh, and make it an Aztec OCC culture VC just for fun ;)

edit:

given the sheer lack of an ETA for the patch, you can likely get away with doing this one before it comes out. There's no real 'balance' changes coming, so it shouldn't affect the outcomes much.

Stefanskantine
Apr 17, 2011, 08:37 AM
Aye, there's probably time before the patch. Weren't those patch notes for only 1/2 of the patch? Probably a long ways off.

ButSam
Apr 17, 2011, 10:15 AM
I vote no policy saving. I would be extremely interested to see and hear about how others go about the culture victory now that it is significantly harder to achieve. With policy saving it is not nearly as fun IMHO.

I also vote that we start a tiered system for TSG series. It seems like now that we're moving on to #11, TSG is more than just a couple-month filler until GOTM is established. Would it be difficult to offer a slightly lower difficulty level as well? I'd play Prince or King. Emperor is pretty tough though for me; I normally lose on King but can win most of the time on Prince.

I'm not sure how much more difficult that makes it on y'all, but it would be nice, even if other difficulty level(s) were not scored (they were just so you can play the same map with the same civs).

EDIT: Finally, I also vote that there may be time for 1 more before the patch. I see you've done 10, and the game has been out for what 7 months? So it's about a half a month or so between games? If recent patch history is any indicator, the patches usually go something like this --
* Patch announced, possibly with notes
* A week later, patch is announced to be in the "finishing touches", with edited patch notes (normally additions)
* A week later, the patch has an ETA that is about a week down the road.
* Patch released, roughly 3 weeks after initial notification

So, if it comes out soon, there may be time.

Sheath
Apr 17, 2011, 01:47 PM
I also think we could do another game before the patch. I remember waiting weeks for the last patch after it was announced.

About policy saving: I like to play personal games with it enabled because it's less stressful than needing to time techs with culture although I think it takes more skill to do the latter and gotm should be encouraging that. Also, I suspect that a player like Dave who can really see the meta game would get an even bigger advantage from it.

One more point -- it's currently not allowed in HOF games so should GOTM be helping players get better and competitive in something like HOF or should it be a place to test out ideas and have more fun than something like HOF? I vote the latter, but the question might be worth thinking about.

leif erikson
Apr 17, 2011, 04:26 PM
I also vote that we start a tiered system for TSG series. It seems like now that we're moving on to #11, TSG is more than just a couple-month filler until GOTM is established. Would it be difficult to offer a slightly lower difficulty level as well? I'd play Prince or King. Emperor is pretty tough though for me; I normally lose on King but can win most of the time on Prince.

Sorry, but a tiered system as is used in Civ4 atm will not happen here anytime soon. It is basically a function of the editing tools for Civ5 being too immature, at least as far as I have learned how to use them up to now. The Civ4 WorldBuilder is integrated with the game software and is fairly simple to use. In Civ5, you have the game software, a separate WorldBuilder and a separate ModBuddy. Have not found these tools to be well integrated nor easy to use for the simple editing needed to run a tiered GoTM. Trying to create one save twice a month using Civ5's tools is challenging.

We would also need a submission system to handle these varied saves. This is not yet ready either.

I think part of the goal of GoTM is to challenge players and provide a place for them to learn from more experienced players, thus the In-progress and After Action threads.

If someone is talented with Civ5 WorldBuilder and ModBuddy and is willing to try to teach an old dog a new trick or two, please let me know via PM.

I do not wish to change the subject of this thread, so if we need more discussion of this then we will have to start another thread specifically addressing this. Just wanted to try to answer the question. :)

godotnut
Apr 17, 2011, 11:07 PM
I don't like policy saving, because it limits choice in terms of how to approach the game. I think not allowing it will encourage people to explore a greater variety of overall strategies.

Airey
Apr 18, 2011, 03:53 AM
+1 for no policy saving

Doubt anyone is going to play both ways and do a comparison...no offense, MadDjinn
if policy saving is enabled, everyone's game would be very similar
the fun part about GOTM is comparing and seeing what other people's strategies are
thus, 1 vote for No Policy Saving

ButSam
Apr 18, 2011, 10:34 AM
That works; I totally understand. I may play along with this one but not submit (as I will prolly want to reload a few times and read others' reports ahead of time since I've never played Emperor and only won once on King back when the AI was MUCH worse than it is now...back when the game was first released). Still definitely vote for "No Policy Saving". Very interested in results people get playing this way. I think it makes you manage tech better too, people will want to time policy and tech advances to a new era, particularly trying to get to Patronage and then Freedom unlocking, I would guess. Really curious to see how this goes.

RedRover57
Apr 18, 2011, 04:05 PM
I also vote for no policy saving, and I also think it would be fun to do an OCC Aztec cultural win on a standard pangaea map. Cultural wins are too easy on most other map types, particularly with policy saving. OCC would mean that you couldn't have a huge puppet empire, but could still war and raze your way through the game if you so desire (taking advantage of the Aztec UA).

MadDjinn
Apr 18, 2011, 07:19 PM
+1 for no policy saving

Doubt anyone is going to play both ways and do a comparison...no offense, MadDjinn
if policy saving is enabled, everyone's game would be very similar
the fun part about GOTM is comparing and seeing what other people's strategies are
thus, 1 vote for No Policy Saving

none taken. I don't like the concept of the games with policy saving on either. It takes the skill out of the game. (Ie, getting the right timings down, etc)

Neuro
Apr 19, 2011, 02:27 PM
I'm fine with either policy saving or no saving; it's just a different animal with each.

Please don't use Aztecs, that's the same civ we used for the last culture game.

Civs that have been used so far:

1) Rome (Domination)
2) Egypt (Science)
3) France (Culture)
4) Iroquois (Diplo)
5) Aztec (Culture)
6) Russia (Any)
7) Songhai (Any)
8) Greece (Science)
9) India (Diplo)
10) China (Domination)

That leaves us with Persia, Siam, Ottoman, Japan, Germany, England, America, and Arabia as the unused civs. Siam is too powerful for Culture games, I'd rather see some changes. Perhaps England on Small Continents.

Farrapo
Apr 24, 2011, 08:42 AM
Suggest not allowing policy saving for the reasons most people stated above. Also suggest asking players to see if a decent result can be obtained without using RAs and report some results with and without them. I have an intuitive feel that they have too great an impact on the game. Owing to travel could not participate in TSG10, but will try TSG11 w/o RAs and definitely w/o SP saving.

EricRoush
Apr 28, 2011, 04:20 PM
Any chance that you could drop the patch hold and run another game? After all, we Mac players have just gotten caught up to your build!

leif erikson
Apr 28, 2011, 08:39 PM
Any chance that you could drop the patch hold and run another game? After all, we Mac players have just gotten caught up to your build!
Sorry, the patch for windows is out. :dunno:

nthexwn
Apr 29, 2011, 02:48 AM
Sorry, the patch for windows is out. :goodjob:

*fixed*

Ribannah
Apr 29, 2011, 01:58 PM
There is talk of a second part of this patch. Not sure what to make of that.

MadDjinn
Apr 29, 2011, 03:33 PM
Sorry, the patch for windows is out. :dunno:

so uhm...

patch is out, where's #11? :goodjob:

leif erikson
Apr 29, 2011, 04:44 PM
There is talk of a second part of this patch. Not sure what to make of that.
This is what 2kGreg posted here. (http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?107147-2kGreg-Mystery-addition&p=1382461#post1382461)
The "much requested addition" is going to be in the second part of the patch scheduled to release in the coming months. I'll be discussing the addition next week.
Sounds as though the second part may be a couple of months away? ;)

#11 will be created and tested this weekend, hoping for a typical Monday start. :please:
If only RL stays at bay... :p

Beef Hammer
Apr 29, 2011, 06:26 PM
I was really hoping #11 was going to be announced before the weekend hit.